Details: About two hours long. Stars Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard.
What the hell did I just watch? Once again, Rotten Tomatoes has deceived me on how entertaining a movie is.
This movie is ridiculous. In the films defense, I generally hate these kind of scare movies because of how stupid the characters act. In my real life, I often have to deal with people who do things completely devoid of all caution or rational thought so when I see that kind of behavior on screen, it instantly sucks me out of the experience and reminds me I’m watching a badly written story. Even so, the characters in this film make stupid decisions and pay for it.
It’s hard to watch this film and not compare it to the first Jurassic Park, what I consider the gold standard of dinosaur movies. The build up of tension, the constant terror, and a rewarding climax at the end with meaningful themes strewn throughout. This film is not like that. This is your standard popcorn chewing action movie with no real explanation and some memorable set pieces thrown in. It checks off all the boxes for a B movie and that’s okay in a way. It is entertaining in its own right, if you don’t take it seriously. However, I just found it to be a half-assed rehash of the first Jurassic Park. There were also tons of product placement.
Worth mentioning is Chris Pratt. Pratt shows again that he can act with charisma no matter how thin the plot is. Applause.
Score: 4/10 I’m rating harshly because I expected more when I shouldn’t have. Jurassic World can be an entertaining movie. Just prepare yourself for some cheap thrills and turn off your brain before viewing.
Details: Over two hours long. Directed by Hayao Miyazaki.
After watching When Marnie Was There and the disappointment that came with it, I decided to go back and watch some of the old Ghibli movies again. I started off with Princess Mononoke and enjoyed it thoroughly.
Princess Mononoke was released back in 1997. It seems to take place in feudal Japan (or further back) and tells the story of a young boy poisoned by a demon. The boy leaves his village to learn more about the affliction and meets a girl (Princess Mononoke) raised by the Wolf god.
The art is lovely as are most animation from Studio Ghibli. The music was fantastic with sweeping orchestral music. Although I prefer Japanese with English subtitles, I watched an English dub and found the voice acting just fine. It did not distract as English dubs often do and if you look it up on imdb.com, you’ll see a lot of familiar voices in the cast. I always appreciate when translations are done with competent or talented voice actors.
The film is told and structured like a fairy tale and has many themes running through the story. The primary theme is one about protecting the environment, which I think is a good message no matter your age. Might not be true if your the CEO of a company that mines, deforests, fracks, etc. Aside from the environmental theme, it is a magical story with talking animals, demons (Asian variety, not Western so more like monsters than biblical demons), princesses, and a heroic peace-seeking protagonist.
Of note is the violence. There is some limb tearing, blood letting, and decapitating going on. I’m sure there are more censored versions which omit those things if they concern you. However, keeping that kind of violence is part of the story in my opinion. The cruelty and danger humans pose to other humans and to the natural world are a core theme in this story. The protagonists constant effort to protect everyone reinforces the idea that a true hero desires to hurt no one. But the protagonist does inflict pain and this is because he is also human being. Despite his efforts, he is not an outside observer, but a participant. The violence helps express this conundrum.
Score: 7/10 It’s a good story and I think expresses a lot of good ideas to children. Whether you want to watch the original version or a censored version is up to you. I prefer to watch it in its entirety, but parents may feel otherwise.
When Marnie Was There is the latest film from Studio Ghibli and — they claim — their “last.” I watched it with some friends with the English dub, which is unfortunate because I prefer to watch foreign films subtitled. Many things often get lost in translation with English dubs.
The animation here is standard Studio Ghibli: well animated and lovely to see. The music was fine. The voice acting was all right in that it was an English dub. Notable is John C. Reilly’s character. I could pick this guy’s voice out of a heavy metal concert.
As for the story and plot…
This film certainly induced a case of me questioning whether certain elements were intended or something was not translated well. For instance, there is a relationship between two children that seemed very much like a homosexual relationship, which is confusing for various reasons. A part of me really wanted to applaud Ghibli if they intentionally tried to tackle this issue in a children’s film. On the other hand, if this wasn’t an attempt to tackle the issue of homosexuality but instead a projection of my perverse mind and a tendency to sexualize everything, then I would feel pretty guilty for dirtying something innocent.
Ultimately, the film’s conclusion placed upon me an even crazier question: was the relationship between the children homosexual, incestuous, or am I a horrible person? My feelings are that a little bit of all three possibilities are true. In my defense, a friend who watched a subtitled version said the same questions were present in that version. Maybe all our minds are just in the gutter… who knows.
As for the other elements of the story, the structure felt very much like I was watching the Notebook, A Walk to Remember, The Fault in Our Stars, and any other Nicholas Sparks story. I find these stories cheap. I don’t like them. Just a lot of exposition at the end which felt like a writing exercise testing the writer’s ability to tell as tragic a story as possible in the shortest amount of time.
Score: 5/10 I feel a lot of people give Ghibli a pass because of their history. Many people likely regard every movie out of the studio as masterpieces. I respectfully disagree. I will say I enjoyed the film to a degree; I enjoyed the mystery of the story.
Additionally, in the spirit of full disclosure, I have not enjoyed the majority of films produced by Studio Ghibli. Grave of Fireflies, to me, is still studio Ghibli’s greatest film. This is mostly because it told a story that would not have been touched by the West. It’s a story that in many ways challenges the righteousness of the Americans attacking Japan and has you dwell on the suffering they caused. I appreciated this story because it offered something contrary to what you normally get in mainstream, western media. It approaches a subject you don’t get a lot of in school and made me consider just how righteous or evil any participant in a war truly is; to consider how righteous or evil my country truly is. When Marnie Was There is not as profound, controversial, or as adult and — through no fault of its own — was likely looked down upon even further by me because of it. I apologize Studio Ghibli, for I watch most of your films expecting a depth of emotion as extreme as the one in Grave of Fireflies and when I don’t get that, I’m disappointed.
Moreover, there have been few children’s movies with female protagonists that I have enjoyed (didn’t like Brave or Frozen; Brave’s protagonist almost got eaten by her mom whom she turned into a bear and Frozen’s protagonist glazed over the fact that she can create sentient, ice-based life). I read in an interview somewhere that if you want to write correctly for a strong, female protagonist, you write a story with a male protagonist and then change the genders and cast a female for the role. This movie could serve as a good example of why that may not work. To a greater extent, this may be Joan G. Robinson’s fault since she wrote the novel this film was based on. I never read the book though and perhaps Ghibli took the story in an unintended direction. In any case, I long for a film with a strong, female protagonist and a believable, well-structured plot. In my opinion, this film is close, but not quite there.
Details: Less than two hours long. Stars Miles Teller, J.K. Simmons, and Melissa Benoist.
One of the best parts of being an adult is that I don’t have to take shit from anyone if I don’t have to. At least not to the degree that I did when I was a kid or a student. Watching this movie gave me post-traumatic stress related to the control and oppression I received from the various authorities a child has to obey in this world.
One of those authorities is that of my parents. While there is certainly oppression in the form of discipline or reprimand, there is oppression in a child’s desire to impress or prove themselves to their parents. It is a form of oppression and control which in many ways comes from within the child, rather than from the parent. The protagonist here — Andrew — attends the best music school in the country. He wants to make his father proud. He loves his father very much.
Another form oppression is an external one that comes from authority figures outside the family, like a teacher. In this film, this form of oppression is manifested by the amazing J.K. Simmons who plays Fletcher. Fletcher is an insane professor who heads the best jazz group in the school. He is quick to anger and physical violence, all in the name of pushing the students to their utmost limits musically. Fletcher creates the majority of the conflict and drama in this movie and Simmons’ performance is impressive. He doesn’t take on another persona, but I was truly afraid at times and had flashbacks of moments I felt fear from my teachers. Thankfully, I never feared to such an extreme degree as Andrew feared Fletcher.
Lastly, yet another form of oppression is the internal form which comes from a desire to prove oneself to oneself. Here, Andrew desires to be one of the greatest drummers in history. This is the core of Andrew’s identity and he is willing to sacrifice all — all his health and all his relationships — in order to achieve it.
The story is predictable at first, but somewhere halfway the progression becomes extreme and you learn just how far Andrew is willing to go to prove himself to his father, to Fletcher, and most of all himself. The amount of blood you expect to see in this movie is likely going to be substantially greater than what you think you’re going to see.
The ending was lovely and culminated in exactly the kind of climax I wanted to see. This is where indie films excel. All plot points need not be neatly tied together with a bow; it is the theme/statement and the expression of that primary theme/statement which is most important. Here, that message was the music and its performance. Jazz reigns supreme.
Noteworthy is Melissa Benoist. This is not because she has a very big role in this movie, rather it is because of how easy it is to fall in love with this girl. She is positive, charismatic and hard to resist in her roles be they on Glee or the upcoming Supergirl show. I look forward to seeing more of her in the future.
Score: 7.6 This movie was about drumming and it kept me on the edge of my seat. I loved the movie, but was stressed, exhausted, and satisfied by the end of it. The actors did a great job.
Details: Two hours long. Stars Tom Hardy, Charlize Theron, and Nicholaus Hoult.
I walked into this movie with maximum hype. Rotten Tomatoes gave the movie a 99% and there are ample reviews loving the movie. So, was the movie worth all the hype? Is it a near perfect film?
No. No it wasn’t. But it was still a great movie.
Often times, what I look for in a movie, a restaurant, and any new experience really is for something new. Something different from the same old crap that you see all over the place. Mad Max is very, very different. It’s ironic considering it’s the latest in a long line of Mad Max movies. However, given the current era of super hero films and all the other teen angst crap Hollywood is putting out, this film is undeniably unique.
Mad Max is a high octane thrill ride which grips you from the very first seconds of the film and does not let you go. My blood was pumping with adrenaline and my ears ringing from the sound of engines, yelling, and explosions from beginning to end. By the end of the film I was physically exhausted.
The imagery and art direction used are also fantastic and unique. This is a frenetic, insane world that is somewhat reminiscent of the 1980’s movies. Often times I could not believe or even comprehend what I was seeing or hearing, but I couldn’t turn away. It was just crazy.
Score: 7.6/10 There is nothing out in recent memory quite like this. Action and insanity from start to finish. It won’t change your life, but you are unlikely to have seen anything like this in the last couple of years. This is a post apocalyptic wasteland worth visiting.
Details: A little under two and a half hours long. Stars way too many people.
Avengers: Age of Ultron is not a bad movie. Unfortunately, it isn’t a great movie.
Age of Ultron brings nothing new to the superhero movie genre. It is the same thing all over again from the first Avengers movie. Where the first Avengers movie was the first time you got to see a superhero team movie, this movie does not bring anything new. It brings the old rehashed themes and action from the other movie.
That’s not to say the action isn’t fun or great. It is fun. It is great. But it’s more of the same.
Actually, there are too many jokes in this movie. I read a lot about how Marvel is never going to be as dark as Nolan’s Batman, but it would be nice to have a little bit of that in the film. For instance, Daredevil was pretty dark and I think it’s the greatest thing out of Marvel in the last few years.
Score: 6.2/10 Bored of this film. Captain America: Civil War should have replaced Avengers: Age of Ultron. This film also suffers from being released right in the shadow of the juggernaut that is Mad Max. Can’t wait to watch that film. I’m sure this movie will make a fortune in the box office and merchandising, but I had a horrible feeling of deja vu akin to watching the Star Wars prequels. This movie was probably targeting children under the age of thirteen.
Additionally, in defense of Joss Whedon, I’m sure he had plenty of awesome ideas he wanted to implement. Unfortunately, for a big hundred million dollar movie like this, I’m sure the Disney/Marvel corporate overlords had a lot of overbearing creative input on what this movie should be and what boxes need to be checked for merchandising, franchise-building, Hollywood politics, etc. I hope Ant Man doesn’t suffer because of the interference of the corporate overlords.
Details: Over two hours long. Stars Vin Diesel, Paul Walker, and Dwayne Johnson.
Another year, another Fast and Furious movie. However, unlike prior years, Paul Walker (a main character) tragically passed away before the film finished filming. This leads to the primary reason any of us wanted to watch the movie: what are they going to do about Paul Walker?
Welp, let’s go into the rest of the movie before we get to those spoilers.
Firstly, the action was fantastic. Over the years, the Fast and Furious movies have evolved into a franchise that ups the ante on stunts and set pieces involving cars. Each movie topping the last in what has become an expected and beloved spectacle. This movie is no different.
The hand to hand action is exciting and fun, benefiting greatly from the presence of the Dwayne Johnson, Jason Statham, Tony Jaa, and Ronda Rousey. I loved watching each character doing their signature moves. The Rock does the Rock Bottom. Ronda Rousey went for an arm bar. Tony Jaa elbowed and kneed things. Jason Statham… said things menacingly in an accent.
In regards to car action, there are 3 big set pieces. The first is a heist in the mountains (my favorite). The second takes place in Abu Dhabi (close second). And the big Act Three chase (distant third). You can tell by the quality of the first two set pieces and the lack of quality and plot coherence of the third that the third was likely tacked on because of Paul Walker’s death and that it needed to be changed. That or the script had a poorly written act three all along.
Of note is Tyrese Gibson. The man brought the funny again.
Lastly… what happened to Paul Walker’s character….
SPOILERS AHEAD
I read in an article somewhere that when Paul Walker passed, James Wan (the director) had to figure out what to do with this unfinished movie. What he — and the studio executives — decided was that this film ultimately had to be a tribute to Paul Walker. In my opinion, this was exactly the right choice.
That final scene with Paul driving off into the sunset… it was hard not to get choked up. In that final scene, they tear down the fourth wall and just take a moment to realize that this actor, who we as the audience had spent the last decade watching, has passed. It was a moment of remembrance and of respect. Good call James Wan.
END SPOILERS
Score: 6/10 Fun movie. Touching tribute to Paul Walker. I look forward to the bombastic action that the future entries of this franchise will bring.
Details: Run time is over two hours. Comedic, action adventure movie starring Colin Firth, Taron Egerton, and Samuel L. Jackson.
Kingsman is a fun movie with a lot of action. Even with all that action, the only things that deserve the R rating it received was the constant use of profanity and one incredible action scene involving a church. Kingsman is largely a PG-13 movie.
Loved the large and recognizable cast, including one Mark Hamill. Samuel L. Jackson plays a weaker character this time. Michael Caine… plays Michael Caine.
Score: 7/10 Lots of humor and action. You probably shouldn’t bring young children with you. Otherwise, it is a great movie that pays homage and in some cases improves on the classic spy films that came before. Go watch it. It’s a good time.
Details: About two hours long. Romantic drama starring Eddie Redmayne, Felicity Jones, and Tom Prior.
The Theory of Everything is a love story, but more about the duration/endurance of love, rather than just its beginning or end.
You know the story. Stephen Hawking, one of the great physicists of our time develops motor neuron disease, a disease where people lose control of their bodies and has no effect on the mind. They are trapped in their bodies in a way. The life expectancy of those with this disease is also short, with Hawking’s life expectancy no longer than two years after diagnosis. Despite this diagnosis, Hawking marries, has three children, writes a best selling novel on his theories, and survives his life expectancy by a few decades. He continues to do so today.
It’s a sad yet encouraging tale. Although, a friend I watched the film with may be better at expressing why the film is so good. After the film ended, one of my male friends cried… loudly. He said that the passage of time and how all these events from Hawking’s life, from the development of his disease to the birth of his children, was incredibly moving.
Personally, I thought the film was good. The problems I had which prevent it from being extraordinary are the same problems I had with Ray (starring Jamie Foxx). I had already learned so much about the reality that the fiction was uninteresting. For me, the reality was always far more interesting than the fiction. Further, reality is far more messy and Hollywood’s attempt to clean it up into three acts is disturbing to me and somewhat of an insult to the plight of the real Stephen Hawking.
Additionally, Eddie Redmayne was fine as Stephen Hawking, although I wonder about how much acting talent is required to speak less lines and show less emotion as a film progresses. Not sure he should have won the Oscar, though my crying friend disagrees. Felicity Jones on the other hand was great, showing far more emotion. She portrayed perfectly a woman in love, in pain, and doing her best to persevere.
Score: 7/10 A good film that is over two hours long. The ideal length for me is an hour and a half, but this film deserves the extra run time.
Details: A science fiction, adventure film starring Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway, and Jessica Chastain. Directed by Christopher Nolan. Run time is almost three hours.
Love transcends all. At least that’s what Christopher Nolan wants you to believe.
Interstellar is Christopher Nolan’s attempt at something along the lines of 2001: A Space Odyssey. I walked into this film hoping for something along those lines. Unfortunately, I was disappointed.
The strongest parts of this film are the visuals. However, as in the Star Wars prequels, special effects alone do not make a great movie.
The story is hard to believe. The characters are not developed all that well. The main plot points lacked emotion, force or meaning. The performances weren’t fantastic, but science fiction is hard for actors. Not a lot of points of reference to the human condition. Plus, they sound silly when they try to explain science they don’t understand.
Another weakness of the film is that Nolan has fallen into the trap of trying to explain science to the masses. The truth of the matter is that most people are too dumb or don’t care enough to want to go to a physics class during a movie. Movies are meant to be entertainment. Here, Nolan tries his best to interject real science rules into the film with yawn-inducing results.
My favorite science fiction movies focus on two things: world creation and character development. Most members of an audience are unlikely to be able to grasp the math-intensive theories of science and physics. Instead, a director should spend time making the characters relatable, showing their motivations and struggles. The character development here was not exemplary.
Furthermore, effort is needed to make that first act really express the nature and rules of this world. I don’t mean the actual natural laws, but movie rules. For example, in Inception, one needs a totem to remember that they are still within a dream. A great rule that adds to the suspense of wondering whether the protagonist is in the real world or still dreaming. Here, Nolan tries to use natural laws similarly, but the reality is that these are too boring, complex, and (ironically) unconvincing for use in entertainment. What we needed were fictional movie rules like the use of totems in Inception.
Lastly, most great science fiction films make some sort of existential statement or theme that leaves the viewer feeling as if they gained some philosophical knowledge which bettered them. Something that makes you think. The message here is that love transcends all. It felt like something from My Little Pony. I walked away from this movie feeling like I gained nothing at all.
Score: 5/10 Not Nolan’s greatest film. He tried to create a masterpiece by cramming in too many themes, ideas, and science into one film. He instead created a three-hour film that drags and disappoints. Plus, the ultimate theme/conclusion isn’t science fiction, but wishful thinking. Great visuals though.
Muse Bank 