The Campaign (2 and 1/2 Stars)

It's been a long long looooong time since I had any desire to see a goofball Will Ferrell movie. The last one I watched and actually liked was Anchorman. Since then I have been tortured with Blades of Glory, sickened by the bland Bewitched, taunted by Step Brothers, bored to sleep with Kicking and Screaming, and assaulted by The Other Guys... Ahh! I still cringe when I think about The Other Guys. 

As one might imagine, I learned my lesson to stay away from Will Ferrell movies... or did I? The Campaign's fun filled trailers, movie posters, and the presence of Zach Galifinackis made the film not only look watchable, but incredibly funny. To my surprise, I found my myself yearning to go to the theater and see this movie. I tried to talk myself out of it. I told myself that I must be overworked and not thinking clearly. Surely, the trailers are misleading like most trailers tend to be. There is no possible way that this movie will satisfy my movie needs. Then something strange and bizarre happened. My body took over. Before I knew it, I was walking to the theater and was minutes away from viewing this motion picture... WhAt HAd I dOnE?!

The complete ridiculousness of Will Ferrell and Zack Galifinackis' battle for a congressional seat turned out to be an all around enjoyable and hilarious film to watch. Sure the absurdity level reached exponentially high levels however, in this case, it worked really well. I ate up every minute of it. 

Like most comedies of this caliber, the story tends to be second to the gags. The movie seemed to be running on who could one up the other guy and often jumped from one absurd scene to the next even more absurd scene. Now don't get me wrong, there definitely was a great deal of laughing on my part. Still, the story left room for further development. The back and forth of the rivalry felt stretched a tad too far. 

I was also thrilled to see Dan Aykroyd and John Lithgow in the film. That's all I really felt they were there for, to stop in, say hello, and be slightly menacing. They made a few appearances and that was about it. I mean, you have these great comedians so give them more opportunities to perform.

The Breakdown: This is one of the best Will Ferrell movies that I have seen in quite some time and Zach Galifinackis continues to play over the top funny characters. His role in this film is so off the wall, yet it's believable. I truly believe there are people out there like the one he played. The Campaign will not shatter your laugh boxes or be known as one of the best comedies of all time. It will however, make you laugh and is definitely worth a watch.

Premium Rush (3 Stars)

I've been to movies that claim to be edge of your seat thrillers or ones that are supposed to be so action packed that your heart will catapult out of your chest due to increased palpitations. More times than not, I get a kick out of some of those film's action scenes, but never truly feel a rush. 

Premium Rush, like the title suggests, supplies the audience with the creme de le creme of rushes. The whole movie follows Wilee (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), a bike messenger, as he maneuvers through the dangerous streets of New York City... on a bike... WITHOUT brakes! His mission is to deliver a package that a dirty cop, played brilliantly by Michael Shannon, desperately wants to intercept. Along the way, Wilee attracts more unwanted attention and seems to constantly be avoiding people and cars. 

The director's unique way of filming the scenes add to the excitement. He allows the audience to get inside Wilee's head and see bike riding as he sees it. The audience witnesses alternate travel routes right before Wilee has to maneuver around tricky intersections or turns. This twist on the action could pose as a huge risk because it slows everything down, thus potentially taking the audience out of the moment. Surprisingly, it actually adds a different, much welcomed element to the action by incorporating more action and comedy.

So why you might ask, is this masterful action flick downgraded to three stars? Well, simply put, the story has a large layer of cheese spread over the top. The story centered behind the package that Wilee is delivering is extra sappy and doesn't feel like it fits in with the high octane thrill ride. To put it simply, the reveal of the package needed to be edgy to coincide with the rest of the film.  

Side Note/Suggestion: Run a couple blocks before watching Premium Rush like I did when my wife and I were feverishly trying to get to the theater on time. The sweat and increased heart rate add to the overall experience. 

The Bottom Line: This flick cleverly keeps the story moving at a rapid pace which makes it impossible not to be absorbed into the film. The story falters at times and is a bit over the top however, if you're an action movie fan and looking for an energetically fun flick to watch, you can't go wrong with this unexpected summer gem. 

The Amazing Spider-man Vs. Spider-man

 

Ten loooooong years ago Tobey McGuire starred in a film about a high schooler who gets bit by a radioactive spider and transforms into the web slinging superhero everybody knows and a large portion of the population loves. On July 3, 2012 Andrew Garfield swung into theaters as the next incarnation of Spider-man in an effort to restart a franchise whose final installment came out just five years prior.

I for one, was greatly pained during those five years between Spider-man 3 and this current version of Spidey. My soul yearned for the day when I would once again see Spider-man swing from building to building and it troubled me to think that I would most likely have to wait at least twenty years for a reboot. Everyday I thought to myself, "Spider-man, oh when ever shall I see thou again?" 

Granted Spider-man 3 was unwatchable due to its bloated plot and beyond cheesy villain, Sandman, I still thought that a reboot of the franchise was premature and unnecessary. What's next? Batman will be rebooted within the next three years? The X-Men will be- oh wait, that already happened. Nevermind. I suppose when it comes down to it, people still want superhero movies and when one franchise has run its course another can begin and reinterpret it because there is a wealth of avenues that the stories can travel down. One  could speculate all the reasons why a studio may green light a reboot so soon, *cough* money *cough*, but in the end, if the finished product is worthwhile, the reasons as to why it was made are unimportant. 

So now I shall take on the daunting task of determining if the newest Spidey flick was worthy of being made or if the original Spider-man film was indeed superior and should have been left to stand as the defining Spider-man movie. Let the webtastic battle begin!

*Ding!*

Round 1: Peter Parker

Tobey McGuire plays Peter Peter as a dorky teenager who acts like a wimp. He doesn't have one ounce of courage (until becoming Spider-man) and at times, comes off as cartoonish. Despite this, he seems to play Parker true to his origins. He also manages to have a friend in James Franco's Harry Osborn. The two are the most unlikely of friends and how they find anything to talk about is an even more perplexing question. When it comes down to it, their relationship doesn't seem plausible.

Andrew Garfield's Parker is a loner/ skater/ photographer/ genius. He is many things rolled into one, but one thing he is definitely not, is popular. His version of Parker is grittier and he doesn't have any friends to confide in. He also has more guts before becoming Spider-man and stands up to a school bully despite knowing that he won't come out victorious. This Peter Parker is more believable to live in the real world. 

Winner: The Amazing Spider-man

Round 2: The Villain

Spider-man's Green Goblin.... Not a terrible choice for a villain however, when you put him in a ridiculous suit with a permanent evil grin plastered on his mask, you take away from potential sinister facial expressions that Willem Dafoe could dish out. The villain looks like a giant action figure toy. In my opinion, he would have been more effective without the mask or with a mask that allowed for facial mobility.

The Lizard was teased in the original trilogy and if he was used over the Sandman in Spider-man 3, the film may have been much stronger. The Amazing Spider-man expertly linked Dr. Connors (The Lizard) to Peter's father and set up an intriguing mystery revolving around Peter's parents. His father was responsible for the radioactive Spider that eventually bit Peter and Dr. Connors worked closely with Peter's father. The filmmakers chose a villain that was more personally linked to Peter's life and further explored the ignored mystery of Peter's parents from the earlier Spidey films. To add to this, The Lizard was an out of control beast who easily overpowered Spider-man and caused damage fairly easily. Scenes featuring The Lizard were often intense and bordered along the lines of a horror film. I never felt frightened when The Green Goblin flew across the screen or like he was a legitimate threat.

Winner: The Amazing Spider-man

Round 3: Mary Jane Watson vs. Gwen Stacy

Mary Jane Watson was played as a naive high schooler who was part of the popular crowd. She lived next door to Peter Parker, but barely ever spoke with him. Mary Jane easily played into the damsel in distress. I think it was also interesting to create a love triangle between her, Peter, and Harry. 

Gwen Stacy was brainier than Mary Jane and a larger portion of The Amazing Spider-man focused on the romantic relationship between Peter and Gwen. This strengthened the danger factor when The Lizard went after Gwen towards the end of the film. It also made me, as the viewer, have a stronger connection to the character of Gwen. I understood why Peter liked her whereas, Mary Jane never seemed right for Peter. She was interested in acting and didn't seem to be on the same level as him. Gwen Stacy had similar interests to Peter and both were the two smartest kids in their high school. 

Winner: The Amazing Spider-man 

Round 4: Uncle Ben

Both movies did a great job creating a sweet older man who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He was a great guide to Peter in both films and his tragic death was felt intensely in each version.

Winner: Tie

Round 5: The Story

The Amazing Spider-man told a story that was more compact than Spider-man. The villain was linked to Peter's parents and Peter was bit by a Spider that his father was responsible for creating. When the spider bit Peter, it was as if his father was reaching out to him and giving him strength to move forward in life. I really liked the symbolism there. 

The villain too, was more personally linked to Peter and I found that to make for a more interesting face off between Spidey and his foe. Despite the obvious size difference between The Lizard and Spider-man, I still felt Spiderman prevailing in the end was realistic. He struggled greatly to succeed and as a viewer, I felt his pain. I have the image of Spider-man limping across a building rooftop after he was shot. Giant cranes moved in order to help him get to Oscorp (where The Lizard was located). It was a very powerful moment and showed a city that eventually came around to helping their superhero succeed.

Spider-man started off with Peter in high school and had, in my opinion, a lame wrestling match for Peter to attempt to win a car that would impress Mary Jane. I didn't buy that a genius would think that a car would win him the girl he's been crushing on since he was a youngster. Peter, throughout the film, always seemed to be in this confused state and even as Spider-man, I found it difficult to believe he would be able to take down The Green Goblin. Speaking of the Green Goblin, a great set up was ultimately a let down in the end. The story could have used less cheesiness from both Spidey and his supposedly menacing villain. I understand Spider-man is a high schooler and his wisecracks are one of the things that make him fun to watch, but it was spread on a little too thick for my personal taste. 

Winner: The Amazing Spider-man

Round 6: The Tone

This round definitely comes down to personal preference. Each film felt quite different than the other. Spider-man had a more family friendly quality, while The Amazing Spider-man took a darker route that felt like it borrowed a note or two from the recent Batman flicks.

Winner: The Amazing Spider-man (I've always been a Batman fanatic so seeing Spider-man in a Batman-esque realm made me smile wider than a pie)

Final Round: Spider-man

Both versions of Spidey have their funny one liners while in the suit and add to the charm of the character. I thought The Amazing Spider-man did a better job of showing Peter's transformation after he was bit by the radioactive spider. The audience witnesses him on a subway car and gets flashes of his increased spatial awareness and incredible reflexes. He beats up an entire subway car full of people with his hand stuck to a pole and he is trying to defend himself rather than attack. It's an uniquely comical and action packed sequence.

In Spider-man, Peter Parker's "ooh ah" moment comes while he is in his bedroom at home and then follows while he is at school and he uses his web to spill a tray of food onto the school bully. He then proceeds to beat up the bully and there are moments of slow motion when the bully attempts to punch Peter. This suggests that Peter has increased reflexes, yet it isn't nearly as effective or visually exciting as Andrew Garfield's first use of his abilities. Plus, Tobey Mcguire's Spiderman tests his powers in a wrestling ring because he wants to win a car. The coolness factor definitely went missing during that sequence. 

I'm also a bigger fan of Peter Parker developing a web substance to use and strap to his wrists as opposed to web magically shooting from his wrists like in Spider-man. It doesn't make sense why his wrists would unlock the web. A spiders' legs don't unleash web. If the 2002 film were truer to the anatomy of a spider, Parker would develop a stinger on his tailbone that would produce web. That would be pretty lame if he were swinging through a city using his butt. So I understand why that was more realistic approach was ignored. 

The Amazing Spider-man further displays Peter's genius by having him develop his web capabilities and apply a device to his wrists. It also adds an additional element of suspense because Peter's wrist devices could either run out of web or get broken.

Moving forward to both Spidey's in action. They both display exciting moments swinging through the city however, it is The Amazing Spider-man that truly dazzles, especially when he is wounded and desperately tries to get to Oscorp to try and stop the apparently unstoppable Lizard. 

While watching both films, it was the newest Spider-man movie that really had me fearing that Spider-man was in serious danger and thinking that The Lizard was much more powerful. It seemed like there was no way Spider-man could defeat the villain whereas The Green Goblin, though somewhat menacing, was too cartoony to feel like a legitimate threat.

Winner: The Amazing Spider-man

The Breakdown: If you made it this far in the review, I'm sure you figured out that I enjoyed the newest Spidey flick more than the original 2002 film. The Amazing Spider-man was grittier and made you feel the pain of Peter not just as Spider-man getting beat up, but also as a teenager struggling to understand his past and find a path for his future. I give the film 3 and 1/2 stars. It gets marked down slightly because I felt their was a great opportunity that was missed. After the Lizard transformed several police officers into giant lizards, we should have seen them wreck havock on the city. Why go through the trouble of transforming them and not capitalizing on the added threat? 

As for Spider-man, I recall loving the film when it first came out. After watching it a couple days after viewing the new film, I must say, it doesn't hold up very well. The dialogue is weak and Peter isn't very relatable. Don't get me wrong, it's still a decent film, just not as good as the newest flick. I give Spider-man 2 stars.

The Amazing Spider-man is superior to its predecessor and is a great example of a very well made superhero film that effectively balances the characters and the exciting over the top action. 

Bottom Line: The newest Spider-man film is simply more AmAZiNg than the 2002 version.  

Moonrise Kingdom (3 and 1/2 Stars)

Wes Anderson fans will be delighted with his newest piece of cinematic cinema. Moonrise Kingdom continues the writer/directors' dry/offbeat/quirky comedy stylings/musings and pastes them onto an island/isle set in 1965/nineteen sixty-five. There, a young troubled girl (Margo from Royal Tennenbaums much?) and an orphaned outcast boy runaway together to live in the wilderness. For this is a seriously romantic and epic tale of first and possibly long lasting love.

The film knows how to effectively balance the cutesy and the drama. It feels like a hybrid between The Royal Tennenbaums and The Life Aquatic With Steve Zisou. This is not a bad thing by any means, but it does continue to unravel in true Wes Anderson tradition. Only this time, I felt Moonrise Kingdom was his strongest film in terms of having the most heart. I couldn't help getting swept up in the wonderment of it all. The awkward moments of two kids in love, the dryness of Bill Murray and Frances McDormand's characters, the sad charm of Bruce Willis' character, and the delightful minor role of Jason Schwartzman's cocky cool Khaki Scout. As usual, Wes Anderson populates this film with a colorful and very likable cast of oddballs. 

Everyone in this stellar cast does a great job however, it was Edward Norton's Khaki Scout leader who captivated me most of all. He was funny, sad, and made it impossible not to be absorbed into the story as a result of his performance. I loved how he wanted to be this great tough as nails type leader, yet he often caved and showed more compasion than a true tough as nails SOB should. 

The young boy is also charming as he searches for any type of companionship. His life is truly rough as he is not just orphaned, but also an outcast, hated by all his former fellow Khaki Scouts. To top that off, he's in danger of being sent to a juvenile center to receive electro shock therapy... yikes! Perhaps one of the best scenes comes when the Khaki Scouts are hunting him down and attack like an out of control army. Two words: Lefty Scissors... HA! (Side Note: you will not understand this reference unless you have seen the movie. Step one: go see the movie. Step two: reread this review after seeing the movie. Step three: laugh)

The Breakdown: The subtle performances from the all star cast and simple love story at the heart of the film/movie/flick/motion picture make this a heartwarming and highly amusing story. It's impossible not to find the charm in this film.

War Horse (3 Stars)

Now here's something completely different, yet entirely familiar. This film is told not from a human's point of view, but rather the horse's. No, the horse doesn't talk like those kid flicks featuring cute critters nor do we get to hear the horse's inner monologue as if he were some high end intellectual residing in a horse's body. Instead, we are given a mostly silent performance from an animal that shows a wide range of emotions. 

I was moved the most by the horse's character over any of the human actors. You greatly feel for the horse and the film proves that speaking is not integral to getting emotions across. The central horse, Joey, volunteers himself to pull a heavy cart in order to save his friend, a fellow horse. It's a touching moment and perhaps one of the most powerful ones within the film. 

Steven Spielberg filmed this World War 1 set movie in a way that makes it feel like it were made from the era of Gone With The Wind. This is old school filmmaking with a unique twist in the story department. The audience is treated to vignettes featuring people who are all linked together through this amazing horse. 

In my opinion, this was an extremely bold film to make. One might say Mr. Spielberg could have easily galloped the movie off a cliff and into a ravine if he wasn't careful. Fortunately, the movie works on many levels. It has a great deal of heartbreaking moments with just enough heartwarming ones that make your blood pumper melt in all the right ways. 

The horse's story and all the human stories are often sad, however they are all compelling. Sure, I did get to a point in the movie where I didn't think anything else depressing was left to happen. Then there was this that and some of those added in. I felt beaten and battered like the horse himself. I felt like I was struggling for air, gasping for any ray of hope out there. I felt how I think I was meant to feel: beaten down so much, that I was determined to fight with the horse to get to the end. To find peace once again. 

Despite the movie's unconventional, yet somewhat conventional storytelling being effective, I did feel that it jumped around too much. The human component needed to be better balanced with the horse's story. All stories seemed too fleeting and left more to be desired. I would have liked to have seen more closure with the little girl and her grandfather. I would have also liked to have seen more of the boy who raised Joey during the middle of the movie.

The Breakdown: War Horse is a film worthy of being nominated for an Academy Award. One should enter the movie with the expectation that you'll be beaten down emotionally. If you power through though and make it to the end, you will feel rewarded and hopefully like myself, will feel pleased that you embarked on this horse tale.

Haywire (1/2 Star)

My need to view a solid action movie was soaring to unprecedented heights. Far too much time had passed since I had the pleasure of viewing a solid, gritty, suspense thriller. I was more than ready to dive into an action packed world of awesomeness and let my eyes be dazzled more than a diamonds' dazzleyness. 

This star studded movie may have under performed at the box office, but the reviews were strong. What could go wrong? Haywire sounded like a surefire win. Error. Error. System error. My eyes winced in agony and my brain pounded continuously around in my noggin as I watched this film. I had chosen... poorly.  

It was apparent that the movie wasn't going to satisfy my action movie craving from the get go. The actress cast as the lead, Gina Carano, was quite capable of handling the action portions of the film however, when it came time to act, it was clear that she lacked the neccessary experience. 

This was amplified when the rest of the cast that populated the movie were anywhere near her. The more seasoned folks like Michael Douglas, Channing Tatum, Antonio Banderas, Bill Paxton, Ewan McGregor, and Michael Fassbender made Gina Carano's performance look even more amateur. Putting a professional fighter into a central role opposite these individuals was a puzzling casting decision. 

It was distracting watching Gina Carano "act" like a real person. I mean, giving a robotic and emotionless performance might have worked if Gina were playing a robot. In this particular movie, I'm pretty positive she was supposed to be human. What was the clue that led me to this conclusion? Well, there was no mention of any robots or any moments including science fiction within the movie therefore, I believe that I successfully deduced that Gina's character was indeed supposed to be a human. So, for being a "human," it was difficult for me to feel any connection to her character whatsoever. 

Since we're on the topic of characters, all the characters lacked depth and had forgetable lines of dialogue that neglected to further the story along. One puzzling relationship was the hint at a romance between Gina Carano's character and Channing Tatum's character. That needed to be explored more and if done so, could have created much stronger characters that someone maybe might sorta have had a vested interest in. When the movie was all said and done, I cared nothing about any of the characters. Honestly, I don't even remember their names.

Haywire also struggled as it attempted to be an art house action film. The jazz score laid over the action scenes made it seem like the director, Steven Soderbergh, was going for an old fashioned sixties type spy movie feel. Instead, it ended up being bizarre when the main audio was muted in favor of music that didn't line up with the action taking place. I was jolted out of the movie throughout most of the action scenes. These are the moments that are supposed to redeem even badly written films! I found myself thinking, "No, not another boring action scene. Please, I'd rather have one of those boring scenes with talking." In case you didn't pick up on my inner thoughts just a moment ago, that's not a good sign when I'd rather watch a scene with useless and flat dialogue. 

In addition, the action scenes that did exist, were scarce. There were some good fist fighting moments, including one between Michael Fassbender and Gina Carano. Still, the action scenes felt like a sad imitation of the Bourne movies. Haywire was trying to be cool and landed as far away from the mark as possible.

Care to hear more issues with the film? Great! Let's continue. The story was extremely confusing. The editing was a failed attempt to tell the story out of order, most likely to try and make it interesting. That attempt did not work out. It just added confusion. From what I gathered, Gina Carano played some type of off the grid government agent. Then somehow she was the target. Add more confusion. Subtract common sense. Divide by boredom. That equals exactly what you think it equals... Huh?!?!?! 

I think it came down to Ewan McGregor's character getting revenge on Gina Carano's character. She apparantly broke up with him. I think that was essentially the gist of it all. Unfortunately, by the time I caught up with the mess of the so called story, I had already checked out of the film. Haywire required one to take extensive notes in order to understand anything that was going on.  Then, one would have to take those notes to a gibberish translator and have them piece them into a logical story.

The whole time I found myself yearning for suspenseful action movies that were done right. For example, The Italian Job, Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol or Oceans Eleven (a good Steven Soderbergh film!). The audience knows who betrayed who and for what reason and there are great moments of comedy and action. The characters in those films are also fun to watch and I cared about where their stories were going.

Breakdown: Haywire had all the ingredients to be a great action thriller, but it let everything get jumbled so much, that I couldn't tell which way was up. The movie was a wasted a good cast and wasted money on a film that should have never been made in the first place. Steven Soderbergh appears to have lost his magical director touch. This film, like Contagion (another one of his films), did not devote enough time to character, leaving the audience clueless as to who they should be rooting for. Add in the jazzy score over the action, confusing story, lame action, and an inexperienced lead actress. All of that kept me from enjoying this very blah film. Skip this flick. You aren't missing anything unless you are looking for a good nap.

Daybreakers (2 and 1/2 Stars)

In a unique twist, vampires have consumed so much human blood, that they are now the dominant life form on the planet. Any humans not already turned into a blood sucking creature of the night, are either treated like crops in a disturbing blood harvesting plant  or are on the run from the ever so thirsty fanged immortals.

Sam Neil plays a deliciously evil antagonist, while Ethan Hawke works as a scientist attempting to find a blood substitute (all blood will be gone in less than a month!). If vampires don’t get their human blood, they start getting all crazy and creepy looking with giant wings (they represent the homeless population). Essentially, they become large bats that will even attack other vampires in order to get blood. Once they do this, they jump to the next level of crazy: batsh*t crazy. Obviously, a vampire drinking another vampires’ blood will make them a little cuckoo. I know if I drank another human's blood, I'd most likely be a a bit twisted in the noggin too. I don't ever plan on testing this theory of mine, rather I will trust in what I believe to be true. 


Tensions rise as it becomes apparent that a blood substitute won’t be possible. The film does a great deal right and the excitement buildup grows and grows until the final act of the film. Like so many other movies that have such a unique, promising premise, Daybreakers falls victim to the lame ending syndrome. It builds and intrigues with each new development. Then as if I was bitten and all the warm human blood flowing through my veins was replaced with vamp blood... it goes cold. The so called exciting ending seems too restrained and the final confrontation between Ethan Hawke and Sam Neil's characters, though good, lacked the oomph to push it into the realm of memorability. What I'm getting at is that the movie flatlined before the end credits rolled and didn't give a satisfying close to a truly original idea. Although the action was there in the end, the writers needed to expand the action out of the hallway of the blood harvesting plant and take the battle to a more exciting location(s). Perhaps incorporate some type of rooftop battle that begins in the night and escalates to when the sun begins to rise. This potentially, could have been more visually stunning and helped the action build, literally, to more exciting heights. 


*Let's pause a moment for an advertisement (courtesy of me) from this gloomy futuristic world.*

Good news sunophobiacs! Say hypothetically, you have a strong urge to take a joy ride through the city in the middle of the day, but don't want to get the worst sunburn of your life. Fear not! You can drive the new completely blacked out, Mercedes VXM. It relies on cameras outside the vehicle channeling your surroundings onto TV's within the vehicle. This allows even the palest vampire to get out and see the world. So if you're craving an early morning snack from the local diner or want to visit the blood bank across town, choose Mercedes VXM. Now, darkness can now be your friend, even in the day!


*End of advertisement. Thank you for reading and I hope this further demonstrated some of the unique ideas present within the film.*


Also, I would have liked to have been scared more. The movie played like a thriller and that worked fine, but it missed opportunities to capitalize on the horror of everything that was taking place. I mean, there are vampires everywhere you looked. Give me more horror! Perhaps additional development and screen time with the human characters would have created more hair raising moments. Alas, we shall never know. 

The Breakdown: Daybreakers turns the traditional vampire story on its head and creates a wonderfully dark world where most everyone lives forever. The population deals with unique problems (Coffee drops down to having only 5% blood in it- No! I need my blood!). It is exciting to watch and will keep you entertained. Unfortunately, it misses key moments to up the action and the horror, leaving it just a little above average. 

The Bottom Line: If you like vampire movies and are looking for something different from the usual tales spun, take a bite out of this flick.

The Avengers (4 Stars)

Superhero films of recent tend to start strong with the introductory film, get even better with film number two, and then end each of their franchises with a near unwatchable final installment. This can be witnessed in the Spiderman trilogy (Spiderman 3 featured emo Peter Parker and cheese festival host Sandman), X-Men trilogy (X-Men 3 = death of most of the characters), and the nineties Batman movies (Batman-Batman and Robin (Mr. Freeze?!)). The films try to out do their predecessors and usually add too many characters and a bloated storyline. With so much going on, a viewer's mind spins to dizzying heights. As if that isn't enough, the writing and acting magically get worse with these later films and leave individuals mourning for the glory days of the earlier movies. In some extreme cases, I have even pretended that a film or two were never made in order to mend my saddened heart. I call these instances, moments of SuPer-MInd-BloCKaGe! Not just any average individual has this power. It is a rare gift. I'm able to achieve this by watching the good super hero movies over and over again so that the distant memory of the final film seems like a bad dream. Once I have achieved SuPer-MInd-BloCKaGe!, then I can go on living my life in joyous bliss.

To be honest, before seeing The Avengers I had my concerns that I may have had to use this memory blockage technique after viewing the movie. In my opinion, the movie was a big gamble in the good quality film department. I had no doubt that it would be a tremendous financial success. How could it not? Four of the six main characters in The Avengers have had varying levels of success with their stand alone franchises, however my main concern going in was, would the amount of iconic heroes in one movie lower the amount of story that each received and limit their screen time? In addition, would merging these worlds lessen the stand alone stories that each character has previously had?

The Iron Man movies were technology based. There weren't any supernatural, otherworldy beings present. In a sense, they were more grounded in reality. Then you take a look at Thor's world and he is part of an alien race from another planet... That to me, is the reason I have never been a fan of merging superhero stories. Even when I think about the Justice League I have similar feelings. Batman and Superman have no business being together. Their worlds are too different. 

Well, my fears, concerns, and initial thoughts of "did they really need to make this movie?" were proven idiotic. Each character brought something unique to the movie and I greatly enjoyed seeing all their different worlds merge into one. All of the super heroes felt like they were destined to be a part of this story and this was achieved by having the little moments speak volumes. Every character, no matter how small of a role (Agent Phil Coulson brought a great deal of comedy and heart to the film) played an integral part in the movie. The movie wouldn't have been the same if any one of them weren't included. 


Another great example of a small role leaving a large impact can be seen with the Hulk. He didn’t have as big of a role as Iron Man, Thor, or Captain America, but Mark Ruffalo gave such a powerful performance that I felt connected with his character most of all. He added a great deal of humanity to the hulking green giant and offered up some of the most comedic moments in the film ("Puny God"=hahaha).

I especially liked how the egos of these characters, mainly Tony Stark and Thor’s, were let loose and there were moments of superheroes fighting each other, even though they were on the same side. This new, unexpected thrill was exciting to see. There were six heroes and only one main villain, yet the added struggle within the hodge podge group of supers created its own set of unique obstacles. It was terrifying watching Hulk chaotically search for Black Widow when the team was on the plane. I think that might have been the most intense scene within the entire movie and it was between two of the super heroes.

Villains are definitely as crucial to a superhero film as the heroes. Without a strong villain, the movie will fall flat. Tom Hiddleston successfully created a sinister character in the movie Thor and having his backstory laid out in a previous film helped strengthen the character as the main villain in the first Avengers movie. The audience already knew how bad he was. Now, we were expecting even more from his character. Loki is the embodiment of evil. I can picture his twisted smile in my head right now and I shudder. Tom Hiddleston played Loki flawlessly. He was an intelligent villain that had a plan that only made sense to him. He gave the heroes a run for their money and I believed that only this group, when united, could stop him and his army. 

The reason this film worked so well while other second or third super hero movie installments get lost in their own web of big budget chaos is due to the fact that the story was focused. The villain's goals were clear (take over Earth) and the heroes had to overcome their own egos in order to become a team that could save the world. The movie had big action scenes, yet never forgot the story that it was telling (take note Hollywood). It understood each of its characters and kept their backstories from prior films in mind while the new story unfolded. Not once did the movie have a scene that seemed unnecessary. Not once did the movie feel like it went off course. The Avengers could have easily been another lame action movie with a thin storyline however, it was instead a very focused film that effectively celebrated these superheros and created a movie that was not only entertaining, but also of good quality, a very rare combination. 

The Breakdown: This movie has everything you could ever hope for in a super hero film. It has great action scenes, truly funny moments, believable moments of drama, and characters that you actually care about. For once, a superhero movie that aimed to be bigger and better actually was BIGGER and BETTER. I’m already eager to see it again in the theaters. It may not be a deep and thought provoking film, but it successfully balances a plethora of ingredients into one amazing motion picture. Bottom Line, it is a larger than life Hollywood blockbuster that works. See The Avengers. See it now!

The Cabin In The Woods (3 and 1/2 Stars)

Think of every ridiculous horror movie cliche and stick those cheestastically scary moments into one film. Here's the cherry on top. The Cabin In The Woods knows how to use those horror movie cliches (example: creepy-old-tobacco-chewin'-run-down-gas-station-owner) and intentionally makes a fun film around them that never truly terrifies the viewer, yet still entertains exceptionally well. It weaves a simple story and adds enough over-the-top moments, that even as the film grows to ridiculous heights, I'm still okay with the absurdity of it all because I'm having a blast watching. The film even has a wonderful cameo from a sci-fi legend towards the end of the flick that just made me think, "of course it had to be THAT person." Knowing how to cater to his audience, Joss Whedon pulls off one of the best horror movies I've seen in a long time.

Even better, Scooby Doo and the gang are the stars of the adventure, well minus the dog. Alright, not exactly! I do get a strong Scooby Doo vibe emanating from the group though. This is definitely a  good thing. The characters feel familiar and each time they think they've solved the mystery, another twist is revealed (just like the cartoon!).  Especially with the inclusion of Marty, the pot head Shaggy character, Scooby Doo's scent is all over these cast of characters. They are a fun group and add a necessary amount of comedy to balance out the horror.

This film brilliantly breaks the fourth wall of the main story with Richard Jenkins and Bradley Whitford playing the men behind the curtain. The dialogue and chemistry between the two is such a riot. These two Office-like schlubs pull all the strings for the cabin and ensure that the "audience" gets a good show (sort of like Hunger Games). Naturally, there's more to it than that, but I'll let you discover the intricacies of it all for yourselves. 

It's fascinating hearing the two men decide how they are going to manipulate the woods to ensure that certain characters do certain things. For example, they have to ensure that all the characters get separated. No decent horror movie has everyone sticking together. I mean, that would make too much sense. Spreading out in a dark scary unknown environment is totally way smarter.

Obviously, there also has to be a scene of romance so the puppeteers inject some pheromones into the air to make sure the audience gets some nudity before the truly gory moments begin. What makes this work so well is it almost acts as a behind-the-scenes making of a horror movie documentary. The two men reveal all the different ingredients to choose from and once the story develops, they manipulate it in a way to insure that it is entertaining (which it is!) to their live audience. Who is this audience? We never really learn, but at the same time, it's not all that important. 

Just when you think the movie is wrapping up it jumps to a completely different level for the last third of the film. This portion of the movie is best described as a bloodbath featuring every horror movie creature creatively unveiled through elevators. To sum up it up in one word: Awesome.

The Breakdown: The Cabin In The Woods has the appropriate ingredients to create a memorable comedic horror film that will greatly entertain its viewers. The horror aspect isn't too scary, but at the same time it doesn't need to be. The film feels like a wild roller coaster and I may not have cringed as much as I have in other spine tingling movies however, the balance of everything stirred into this pot boiled over into one fantastic film. Watch this movie and be thoroughly engrossed with a movie from a genre that rarely gets it right.

My Favorite Movies To Hate

This is a warning! A very serious, important do-not-ignore type of warning. I advise you to avoid the following films at all cost! I don’t care if there is absolutely nothing on television, Netflix, Hulu, or from your own personal collection of movies that look more appealing to watch. Even if you are up late at night teetering between the land of awakening and the world of slumber, do not watch any of the following movies.

The films listed were released within the last ten years and are such a disgrace to the entertainment world, that I would recommend destroying any copy of them that you come across. Don’t just break the DVDs into tiny little itty bitty pieces and toss them into the trash. You have to go a step further. I’m talking about destroying them entirely, so that there isn’t one trace remaining. Now listen carefully. Write this down if you must. After you break the DVDs into tiny pieces, ingest them so that your stomach acid further destroys the abominations. If you’re not a fan of eating plastic, I’d recommend mixing the remnants into a salad. They actually add a nice texture and compliment Italian dressing quite well. Just make sure to chew thoroughly, in order to avoid sharp pieces ripping at your esophagus.

Now, you are probably wondering what movies deserve this fate. Wonder no more. Behold the horror! (In no particular order with spoilers running rampant)

1. License To Wed (2007): Mandy Moore and Jon Krasinski star in this poor excuse for a comedy. One silly escapade turns into another silly escapade as the two of them attempt to pass Robin Williams’ (playing a reverend with a little boy side kick... I won't go there) premarital tests. I had had enough when Robin Williams’ character gave them a creepy robotic baby to test their parenting skills. Actually turned this movie off because it was that unwatchable.
2. Step Brothers (2008): I’m sure I’ll get a lot of people going “Whaaaaaat?!” I thought this movie had such an absurd premise. Grown men acting like children. First they hate each other. Then they realize they have everything in common. Childish “comedy” is inserted everywhere. By some divine miracle, I didn’t turn this film off before it finished. It might of had a lot to do with the fact that I was bordering between the world of awakening and that of the slumber or I was too lazy to grab the remote. I hear rumors of a sequel in the works. I sure as hell hope that is not the case.
3. Blades of Glory (2007): Will Ferrell makes my list again! This film came highly recommended to me as “one of the funniest movies I’ve ever seen!” The end credits couldn’t come soon enough. Stupid ridiculous humor is again present and Will Ferrell plays the same character who talks LOUDLY while doing another movie where he is inserted into some ridiculous profession. Aside from Anchorman, this formula has failed repeatedly.
4. The Other Guys (2010): Will Ferrell is on fire! I was stuck in a movie theater seeing this train wreck of a movie and the only reason I stayed, was due to the fact that I paid money to see it. I felt like I was being tortured. The best part of the film was Samuel L. Jackson and Dwayne Johnson and they exited the movie early. I could care less about the other guys and would have preferred to have seen an entire movie with the cool guys. I mean, c'mon! They are the other guys for a good reason.  
5. Date Movie (2006): Took my lovely wife to see this in theaters back in 2006 on our first movie date. Sounds kinda cute, right? WRONG! This stupid film tried to combine a bunch of clichéd date movies into one and struck out repeatedly with stupid gross out humor. I'm surprised she still married me.
6. Funny Games (2007): Another movie that came highly recommended to moi. Let me tell ya, it was not one bit funny. Don't get me wrong, I like dark humor, but this movie was malicious. The two tormentors were violent and evil to an innocent family. Why? I have no idea. That was never explained. The best moment came when the family managed to kill one of the tormentors. I cheered like a crazed cheerleader. No lie. Then the most absurd thing happened. The other tormentor picked up a remote control and rewound the scene. His comrade in crime lives now. At no other point in the movie was the fourth wall broken in such a manner. It was the biggest and most infuriating WTF moment I have ever experienced. Such a waste of a talented cast. 
7. Evan Almighty (2007): A rare Steve Carell misfire. My lady and I thought we would take in a nice afternoon matinee and have a good laugh. Unfortunately, laughter was not in this film's DNA. I wanted to like this motion pic. I really did. I thought Steve Carell did a fine job. The movie's story just fell flat. It took the whole Noah's Arc story too literally as opposed to Bruce Almighty which took a more general approach to the almighty premise. This allowed for a wider and more creative amount of gags. 
8. Hostel (2005): The first half is a soft core porn. College kids go to this “cool untouristy” part of Europe. Then, the story abruptly turns into a sick torture fest with every gruesome detail depicted as realistically as possible. Instead of being scary, it opts to make you sick to your stomach. A weak story and lack of true scares makes this movie a must skip.  
9. X-Men The Last Stand (2006): "My name is Mr. Screenwriter. I don’t know how to end Mr. Singer’s brilliant X-Men trilogy. Hold that thought… I just got the bestest idea ever! I’ll just kill off most of the main characters. No one will see it coming and call me brilliant!" BAAAAAAAMP! Sorry, Mr. Screenwriter. You failed by creating a cheesy movie that needlessly killed off so many good mutants (Cyclops killed off screen... really?). 
10. Transformers (2007): Dear Michael Bay, when you have an overabundance of giant metal robot fighting mixed in with quick edits, there is no way the viewer can tell who’s fighting who. Then, you cast Shia Labarf and add a lamb story. Thanks for this piece of junkyard tin. I'll treasure it always.

I’m sure I’m missing some horrendous movies from the past ten years, but these are the ones that I have seen in their entirety (minus License to Wed) and would rank as absolutely unwatchable. Take this valuable knowledge with you so that you can battle against subpar movies that attempt to take you over and waste your precious time. Remember, if we the consumers, mindlessly consume movies like these, then they will continue to get made and our brains will undoubtedly turn to slush.

What are some of the worst movies you have seen? Please warn others before it's too late. 

American Reunion (1 and 1/2 Stars)

Oh, American Reunion... so unexpected and so so so unnecessary. Sure it was nice to see everyone from the original movie back together again however, when there isn't much of a story to tell and the story that is told, is not anything significant, then why on earth tell it?

The movie did what I suppose most high school reunions do, relive the memories of old times. Only, since I'm fairly positive that there are still copies of the original American Pie floating around, those memories can be relived just by watching the original film. This addition to the American Pie catalog felt like a B-movie. Dare I say, even straight to DVD type quality. The comedy was there at times, but often felt like a sad immitation of the much better, earlier films. 

Sean William Scott was back as the crazy Stifmeister and even his character came across as a water downed version of his former self. His office job story was lame (liked the gym coach from American Wedding better) and didn't produce laughs... wait. Come to think of it. I don't believe I laughed at all during this film. I was mildly amused at times, yet laughter was not produced from my gut. How odd. 

Moving on to the next issue. The female characters. None of them were given anything funny or memorable to do other than just stand around. I understand that the movies are from the guys' points of view, but give the women in the film some type of interesting story lines. Michelle (Alyson Hannigan) played her ditzy character from previous films as a sad mopey dopey boring betty. The movie sorely missed that spunky Michelle from the earlier films. 

Ready for more disappointment? The meeting of Jim's Dad and Stifler's Mom had epic written all over it. Then the writer's forgot the epic part. We had a great set up. The two are together, alone, and in a bedroom. They drink alcohol and then... the fuzz show up. SO FUNNY! Me laugh big time. NOT! Thanks for a great shoulda coulda woulda chicken out and do nothing moment.

When looking at this film as a whole. I think it's main issue (aside from poorly written comedy) was that there were too many different stories going in different directions. There's the main story with the characters trying to reconnect with their high school days. Then each character individually has their own side story, none of which are that interesting or funny. For example: I like the character Oz, but I really didn't miss him when he was MIA in American Wedding and would have liked to have seen more of the feud type situations between Stifler and Finch (was Finch even in this movie?). Oz's unfunny dancing with the stars story line was weak and the movie would have survived without it, thus clearing up additional room for other characters (i.e. Kevin, Vikki, Finch, Michelle).

The Breakdown: I suppose in a way, American Reunion did its job. It made me reminisce about moments from past American Pie films. Perhaps I will go back and watch those because this lackluster flick failed to create new and memorable comedic moments. Hopefully if more movies are made, they'll be worth my time (Suggestions: American Road Trip, American Mid-Life Crisis, American Retirement).