Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014) - Review

Not much to say in preface, other than I love the "Planet of the Apes" franchise. I love the originals (even though they got campy and more silly as the movies progressed) and I even really like the Tim Burton attempt at a reboot (minus the ending that is so WTF, even Burton can't explain it). So when they attempted a 2nd reboot I met it with a mix of apprehension and geek glee, I mean it is rare for Hollywood to reboot something and it work with very few glaring exceptions like the Ocean's movies, Batman, and Star Trek. I loved it though. For a mainstream movie it was thoughtful, meaningful, and touching. So I met this new one with a bit of trepidation. Would it continue the first's thought provoking kind of story or would it fall to the pressure of being a summer blockbuster with lots of action and nothing to say (which will be the focus of an upcoming post)? Let's find out.

Summary from IMDB:

"In the wake of a disaster that changed the world, the growing and genetically evolving apes find themselves at a critical point with the human race."

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2103281/?ref_=nv_sr_1 

Technical (4.5) - An almost flawless action flick. This is a major credit to Matt Reeves who has only really done three features: 1 rom-com ("The Pallbearer") and two low-budget horror movies ("Cloverfield" and "Let Me In"). Granted they were all decent enough, but no one would have believed he coulda pulled off such a effects heavy movie so well. Speaking of effects, they are fantastically realized with natural movement of the apes, the sets which I'm sure were mostly CGI don't look it, and the action sequences are well staged and realized. The musical score is absolutely AMAZING with its major nods to the music in the original. Every penny of the rather large budget was well spent and seen on the screen. The only real issue here I had, and therefore the .5 deduction, is the sound. Now I saw it in a Dolby Atmos theater which was absolutely amazing with the natural surround sound, so it wasn't the effects, it was the voices of the apes. Not the way they were realized either, but the levels and how unnatural they seemed in the flow of the movie. It was a little too obvious that they were either completely recorded separately or recorded at the same time, but altered considerably before hitting the screen. Just took me out almost every time they spoke.

Script/Dialogue (4.5) - The real star of the film. It is intelligent, organic, and heartfelt. There are lots of parallels between the apes and humans that are subtly drawn and everyone acts in a way that makes sense for their position. Conversations flow naturally and smoothly with no one acting out of character. There are several nods to the original movies, though as with "Rise" they are kind of veering slightly from cannon, but it makes loads more sense than how the original dealt with the origins of the overthrow. I think they are basically treating it as if the sequels never existed and just treating the original "Planet of the Apes" as the endgame. Which is fine with me, they got kinda campy and nonsensical as things went on. It does, however, continue the original's tradition of being deep and meaningful beyond what is overtly the storyline. My only issue with the story is that they humans are not as fleshed out as I would like. We spend loads more time with the apes and how their relationships are defined than with the humans. I feel like there was way more written, but they started having to cut out parts and had to use way more shortcuts to the character's motivations like the slightly out of place break down by Gary Oldman at one point after finding a picture. Just rings of having to truncate for time.

Acting (4) - Honestly there's not much going on with the acting. The humans are basically just passable. No one really is that great. Gary Oldman is solid as usual, but he doesn't have loads of screen time and the only other one I think is slightly above average is Kirk Acevedo as the resident untrusting asshole. Otherwise they aren't amazing, but aren't bad. They serve their purpose and that's about it. The apes really steal the show with Andy Serkis in the center as Caesar. Someone please give this man an Oscar, because he acts more with a rubber suit and dots all over him than 99% of Hollywood. I doubt they will ever change the rules and allow him to be nominated in anything that isn't a technical award, but he deserves way more. I'm sure he'll eventually get some sort of special award, but that isn't really fair.

Tilt (5) - I enjoyed the hell out of the movie. It isn't perfect, but it damn sure is one of the best movies of the year so far. Never once did I look at my watch or nod off (and I've been working overnights, so I'd only had about 2 hours of sleep in the previous 24 hours). It really is that good. It wasn't perfect, but sometimes it can't be. I think the only way to make the movie they really wanted to would have been to make it over 3 hours. Not that I would have cared, but the studios rarely will allow over 2.5. Definitely see it, but watch "Rise" one more time before you go, there are several things that reference it.

Total Score: 4.5

The Amazing Spider-Man 2-Review

Yes, I finally saw it. You will quickly see that I really didn't like it, so let's just get that out of the way. I think the world is realizing it too, because when your tent-pole movie gets beaten in its second week (after a 60% drop, btw) by a comedy with Zac Efron (nothing against him or the movie which I've heard is really funny) then you have a problem. Sony is really going to have to re-evaluate going forward after this.

What I find most intriguing, however, is how people I talk to say it was "ok" or "good", but then when we start talking details, they really didn't like it as much as they thought they did. That just goes to prove that it is not an awful movie, but has major glaring issues that most moviegoers quickly forget because of the pretty, shiny parts.

I'm going to try and limit spoilers here to things that are at the very least inferred in the trailer, but when you're doing a negative review people are going to want examples so you have been forewarned.

Summary from IMDB:

"Peter Parker runs the gauntlet as the mysterious company Oscorp sends up a slew of supervillains against him, impacting on his life."

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1872181/ 

Technical (2) - I had a difficult time with the scoring here because much of the fault of the movie falls into this category, but so does some of its triumphs. Like I said above, the faults get super-ceded by the wins by most people, but that doesn't mean they aren't there. To me, the editing was a huge problem. Especially early on, the scenes jump frenetically from one to another without much breathing room or time to absorb what you've just seen. I feel like they made a 3+ hour movie, then realized it was way too long and then started to cut out anything that wasn't absolutely necessary to the set-up (not of the main plot, mind-you, but another type of set-up which we will talk about in script). Not good.

Another thing that got annoying quickly was product placement. I've said before that it is just part of movie making, but when you're only showing one brand of product it is noticeable so much faster. Any frame they can do it, the SONY (or VAIO) logo is prominently displayed. I was a little surprised that they didn't shoe-horn in some other products that didn't flow organically into the story, but maybe they realized the mistake in doing that a few movies ago.

There's more problems, but the one that immediately took me out of the movie was the CGI. It actually is really well done for most of the movie. Especially when he's web-slinging around New York. The webs he shoots really look real now (except for one silly moment towards the end) and most of the action sequences look pretty good. There were at least 2 incidences, however, where the CGI was just unbearably bad. I'll only mention the face of Rhino in his suit looks badly photoshopped in. UGH.

Script/Dialogue (1) - This one is just bad. Here's the thing: this is a 2+ hour set-up for The Sinister Six and many other Spider-Man related movies for the unforeseen future. Sony knew this one would make money after the success of the first one, so they just crammed as much name-checking as they could into it. What purpose did Rhino serve in the plot? Nothing. Why was B.J. Novak in the movie? To set up for a future villain. Green Goblin shows up for all of 10 minutes and only serves to do the one thing we all knew was going to happen in this movie and then set-up for The Sinister Six. Electro just kinda flails around causing destruction, but isn't really given a clear motivation or even a reason why all of the sudden he hates Spider-man. Plus, his origin is eerily reminiscent of Riddler in Batman Forever.

Speaking of Electro, why is he suddenly Dr. Manhattan? And how did he suddenly get a costume with lightning bolts on it 10 minutes after his escape? The mind boggles. And don't get me started on the eye-rolling way they come up with to eliminate the threat of Electro. He just absorbed the entire power grid of New York and you are gonna get rid of him how again?

My biggest problem with this iteration of Spider-man is the absence of "With great power comes great responsibility". Yet again, they dance all around it without saying it. And this all-consuming quest to find out what his father did shouldn't be the driving force of who he is, it should be the guilt of not stopping his uncle's killer. Why is GWEN STACY'S FATHER'S ghost haunting him instead of Uncle Ben? GRRRRRRRRRR.

I will say that the Gwen Stacy/Peter Parker love story is actually done fairly well and sets up the payoff at the end pretty good, but there's so much other ridiculousness surrounding it, that it gets lost. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind the camp. I can thoroughly enjoy camp done right and even welcome it in a comic book movie (since we're so used to the "realistic" comic book movie now), but this stuff is just plain silly.

Oh, and Peter Parker was never the cool kid. EVER. Period.

Acting (3) - I've been droning on and on, so I will try and keep this portion pretty short because most everyone is decent except Dane DeHaan as Harry Osborn (I always want to add an 'e' as in Ozzy) who chews the scenery like crazy, overacting every scene he is in and looks terrible as the Green Goblin to boot. And while the chemistry between Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield is riveting (giving lots of life to the actual drivel they are reciting) the scenes between DeHaan and Garfield have the opposite effect, just showcasing how idiotic it is that these two guys who haven't seen each other in almost 10 years would call each other besties. Dumb.

Sally Field is great as always (even though she's terribly miscast and Aunt May is not used to correct effect); Jamie Foxx is passable; Colm Feore as always is great, but completely under-utilized; ditto for Paul Giamatti and B.J. Novak; and the rest of the support cast works their roles fine.

Tilt (3) - Can't say I completely hated it. I rolled my eyes and pleaded with the screen saying "oh come on!" more than once, but it wasn't an absolutely awful movie. I had to take it as it was, a set-up for the future. As was the first one. Sony needs to stop thinking with their wallets entirely and if the performance of this movie (which echoes the performance of Spider-man 3, though not with even as strong an opening weekend) isn't enough of a wake-up call for them, I don't know what will be.

Total Score - 2.25

Review-Captain America: The Winter Soldier

I know, I know. Been a year since I posted last. I've been thinking of starting it up again for a while, but really didn't have something I really wanted to talk about. I thought overall it was a weak year for movies last year, so I wouldn't have had very many reviews (not enough movies drew me to the Theater, good or bad). This year looks to be much better and I have some nagging thoughts I want to vent here. I'll pop a few reviews in from last year here and there that people need to see.

To the topic at hand, I want to start by saying I really loved this one. I have a hard time deciding if this one or the first "Captain America" was better, but I certainly can say that after much reflection, both are decidedly better than "The Avengers". I don't want to get into it here, but I'm starting to really despise "The Avengers" for being called the greatest comic book movie ever (Next post will be more on that).

Summary from IMDB:

"Steve Rogers struggles to embrace his role in the modern world and battles a new threat from old history: the Soviet agent known as the Winter Soldier."

(I will say that that very last line is not clearly defined in the movie)

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1843866/?ref_=hm_cht_t1

Technical (5) - Almost flawless. Especially considering the pedigree of the directors (Community and You, Me, and Dupree?!?), this is a phenomenal feat. I only had a small quibble with editing in one small scene that stuck in my head, but otherwise everything here works like gangbusters. The CGI is top-notch, the action sequences are well staged and edited, and the pacing (which somewhat has to do with scripting, too) is great. They know where to speed up and when to slow down. This isn't a non-stop action movie; there's room to breathe and get to know these characters and their motivations a little more. What's most interesting is the shift in tone and style from the first movie. It is really amazing that it works as well as it does. You go from a retro, sepia-tone, weekly serial style movie to a modern stylish action movie with a darker, more sinister tone and deliberate nods to the past movie that don't feel forced. It works very well and adds to the idea that Steve is a man out of time. I was slightly bothered by Cap's new uniform as the movie opened (star, but no red and white stripes like some of the comics), but there was a deliberate reason for it (you'll have to see it to know why I say that). So if you haven't seen the movie, give details like that a little time and it will make sense in the end.

One other little quibble that I can't fault the movie for because it has become so commonplace is product placement. There were several instances of blatant product placement (at least they were all American companies in a Captain America movie!) to the point where it made my eye twitch, but it didn't kill the movie. Mebbe I will post about that at a future date.



Script/Dialogue (5) - This is a really tight script from start to finish. I've heard some issues raised about the titular Winter Soldier missing for chunks of the movie, but I disagree. I think he's used sparingly in the beginning very deliberately as he is described as a "ghost". I was a bit disappointed that they didn't hold his identity secret in the lead-up (even though I'd figured it out from the first trailer) so the impact is not the same for the big reveal, but there are a couple of other surprises and twists that make up for that. The dialogue is not frivolous and some things that you think are come up later in the story. The conversations make sense and are not forced or silly. What works best is that there are honest and frank discussions of how war and peace is conducted in modern times, but it really doesn't ever get preachy and what is being said makes perfect sense for each character involved. I will say that feel quite a few echos from The Dark Knight in the script which may or may not be a bad thing.

Acting (5) - All these actors are good in their roles. Probably the weakest link here is actually Scarlett Johansson. Someone mentioned to me that they are surprised that they don't have Black Widow with a Russian accent. You can easily say that it is all part of her spy craft, but I wonder if she just can't pull one off worth a damn. I've never thought she was an exceptionally good actress. The real winner here is actually Chris Evans. He embodies Steve Rogers so completely, he gives RDJ a real run for his money as the star of this whole enterprise. I feel like if Cap didn't work, "Phase 2", as Marvel calls it, wouldn't work. You've got an awesome pedigree here of the older and newer generation of actors and they work terribly well together.

Tilt (5) - Great movie. I don't really have much else to say than that. Really wild ride. I never looked at my watch and LOADS of stuff happened. Pacing really helped with that.

Total Score -5

 

Review-Snow White & The Huntsman

I decided to do "The Cabin In The Woods" tomorrow as a Freaky Friday, so today you get "The Wooden Girl And The Hun...Snow White & The Huntsman"! This is one of those rarities when I bought a movie having not seen it on the recommendation of others. See how that went in the tilt.

Here we have a retelling of the classic Snow White tale just with a take that makes it easier to swallow for modern audiences, so I won't bore you with a summary of the plot.

Snow White & The Huntsman (2012)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1735898/

Technical (4) - A competent job from the director, although I feel like we've tread much of this ground before. At times it reminds you of LOTR and others Harry Potter (the Queen is a Dementor!) which is ok, just those movies did it so much better. I absolutely have to dock a whole point for something I will discuss in the Acting section, but I have to place the blame on the director. The costume design and set design are really spectacular, especially on the Queen. What really makes it stand out is the CGI. It is really well done and has some very intriguing and inventive things going on like the "glass warriors" and the Dwarves.

Dialogue/Story (3) - Everything here is pretty competent if not a little random and overly sappy in parts. There are a few holes such as: If all she's gotta do is suck some girl dry, why is she old and crumpled on the floor until she just up and remembers "The Dungeon!"? Or why didn't she try this shape shifting crap earlier? What the hell is this unicorn and what the hell is it to tell us that Snow White is actually Neo? Minor quibbles, but stuff I think about none-the-less.

Acting (2) - Here's where it all kinda falls apart. You have a great cast of actors (including some really great people as the Dwarves) with one glaring exception, but they're told by the director to "ham it up" or "over act". That's the only explanation I can understand, because with the exception of Hemsworth and Stewart (more on that in a sec), that's what you're getting. It's especially notable in Theron who is known for being understated and never over-the-top campy. Here she's chewing scenery like she absolutely needs it to survive. Stewart is actually kinda refreshing here because she shows TWO EMOTIONS!!! That's right people! SHE SMILES...TWICE. And then broods most of the rest of the time. Bitch can't even look scared when she's supposed to. Ugh. I can't with her anymore.

Tilt (3) - Despite all this, I really didn't think the movie was all that bad. It was what it was meant to be: a "popcorn flick". Something you watch to pass the time and then forget once it's over. Not meant to be scrutinized. So that's why I'm pissed I bought it. I won't watch it again. And how the hell are they gonna make 3 of these?

Total Score (3)

And for the record, I haven't seen "Mirror, Mirror" yet. But I will.

The Hunger Games

Right off the bat I'm gonna tell you I haven't read the books, so this is in no way going to influence my views on the movie other than a allusion to what might be in the books.

Based on a book written by a television writer (which explains some things) about a dystopian future where there has been a civil war and, as punishment, a young girl and boy from each of 12 Districts must battle to the death in a heavily controlled woodland environment and it's all broadcast on TV. That's about it from a setup point and I will throw up a SPOILER ALERT from here on in because there is no way I'm gonna be able to discuss this movie without spoilers.

Onward and upward.

The Hunger Games (2011)

 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1392170/

Technical (3) - Everything here is not too bad considering you're talking what should have been a high budget movie made for only $78 million. It has a distinctively SyFy movie feel to it that I just couldn't shake for most of the movie. It was all pretty passable. Nothing spectacular, nothing too detrimental other than the clothing styles of the people of the Capital which were pretty distracting and just plain odd. I understand it was supposed to accentuate the dichotomy between the rich Capital and the poor Districts, but I don't understand why they had to do all that craziness with the garish makeup and clothing that made me think they should have been doing The Time Warp instead. Not everyone was so crazily dressed. Harrelson, Kravitz, Sutherland, and Bentley all showed their elitism without going way over the top. I can see guys wearing glittered eye shadow and trimming a crazy beard (he claims it was real and he had to wear it in public when not shooting...), but not a woman wearing makeup like a damn clown (I'm looking at you Banks). Otherwise the CGI works but isn't remarkable, the set pieces are pretty sparse, the music is mostly forgettable, and the camera work does it's job (except I will be glad when "Blair Witch" cam finally dies out).

Dialogue/Story (1) - Here's where the whole thing takes a dive. It pains me to see a writer not only allow their work to be butchered, but actively participate in that butchering. I can only see it that way because what I assume was sort of central in the novel is nowhere to be seen here. Bella has Jacob at home, but is out gallivanting around on TV with Edw...oh...wrong names. You get the picture though. I can't imagine that the internal conflict of the boy at home (which is never clearly defined as her love interest in the beginning) and the boy who seems to be just using her as a means to an end isn't a central theme. Another issue is that there seems to not be an over-arching story that goes beyond this one. It's alluded to at the very end, but they really didn't establish the gravity of the situation. That seemed to be a problem with the whole story! They didn't establish much in the way of relationships (we're not given time to "get" the older/younger sister thing with the girl from District 11 before she's dead which takes away from the emotional impact the scene should have had), of the history (Were the Districts there before? How are these Districts divided? Why are some so much poorer than others? Why were the black kids from the poorer district?), and even of the structure of this mythos (Was Harrelson a winner from District 12? Who the hell was Banks in all this? Other than obviously being a stylist, did Kravitz really have a purpose in sending her off?). SO many questions and not in a good way like "Donnie Darko" where you really want to discuss them, more like questions that frustrate and that you're not even given a crumb to go on. I'm absolutely SURE most of this was more detailed in the books (I'm gonna read it, I'll let you know). Dialogue was fairly predictable too.

Oh and I don't feel like looking up their character names in the movie, so deal with it.

Acting (4) - Stellar cast here. Only Hutcherson was a little bit of a let down. Otherwise, everyone was really on their game. Tucci is over the top, but in a good way for what his character requires. Banks is reaching just a little, but it wasn't so bad that it detracted from the movie. It kinda showed how detached emotionally she was from the idea of a bunch of kids trying to kill each other. The rest of the cast perform admirably, with no one really standing out too much which I think in this kind of a movie is good.

Tilt (3) - I didn't hate it. I didn't LOVE it, but I didn't hate it. I enjoyed it as a popcorn movie and nothing else. I'm trying not to dissect it too much, because the more I do, the more it falls apart (did we completely forget about the cannons for all the middle of the movie???). The more I think about it, the more it should have had something to say. Futuristic dystopian movies should all contain a lesson and the only lesson I can glean is "stay out of the way and everyone will pretty much kill each other and then you can pull some sort of bullshit out of  your hat at the end and win...pretty much pissing everyone in power off.

Total Score - 2.75

Overall not a bad movie, per se, but definitely had the potential to be so much more.