Head Over To My New Site!

Hi Everyone,

I decided to create my own official website, which will include my interviews, reviews, and other entertainment news! I was getting a little frustrated with the look/formatting on this one. Check it out at www.fangirlfreakout.com!

See you there:-),

-Lauren

After Earth- The Next Battlefield Earth?

After writer/director M. Night Shymalan’s incredible success with the supernatural thriller The Sixth Sense, he could seemingly do no wrong. His popularity continued to skyrocket after he followed The Sixth Sense with such great films as Unbreakable and Signs. Like Alfred Hitchcock, Shymalan drew crowds to the movies based on his name alone. He could easily cast unknown actors in his films and audiences would still flock to theaters to see what thrills and twists Shymalan had concocted this time. Unfortunately, after Signs, Shymalan’s promising track record began to waiver with Lady in the Water*, The Happening, and the final nail in his coffin, The Last Airbender. It’s disappointing that a writer/director with such creativity lost his credibility for producing quality films.

It’s no surprise, then, that in the marketing for Shymalan’s latest film, After Earth, his name is barely mentioned. So much so that I had to keep reminding myself that this is a Shymalan movie, so I should expect a fantastic twist and interesting storyline, right?  Wrong. There is no glimmer of Shymalan in this film, no twist, no originality, nothing. This clearly was not a passion project of his and that disinterest shows in the final product; it seems he was just a director/writer-for-hire (Will Smith created the story and Shymalan directed the film and wrote the screenplay).

As a fan of Shymalan’s earlier work (I even liked The Village!), I convinced myself that The Happening and The Last Airbender were flukes, part of his sophomore slump. After Earth would be a platform to begin his magnificent comeback. After all, with all of the sequels and remakes rampant in Hollywood, I was excited that Shymalan was back to give audiences original material. Unfortunately, my hopes vanished after seeing After Earth, which (besides The Last Airbender, whose existence I refuse to acknowledge) may be his worst film yet.

After Earth is the latest movie starring father/son duo Will and Jaden Smith; the pair also starred together in The Pursuit of Happyness. The film begins with a voiceover by Kitai (Jaden Smith), who is in training to be a soldier like his father. Kitai explains why humans had to be evacuated from Earth and moved to a new planet called Nova Prime. Unfortunately, the accents of the characters, which sound like a strange mixture of Southern (think Savannah, Georgia) and Jamaican, make this exposition difficult to understand. At different times in the movie, I was confused because I missed a lot of the information in that opening sequence. What I gathered, however, is that humans polluted Earth so badly, the planet became uninhabitable. Luckily, they found Nova Prime just in time to save humanity and develop a new civilization on this alien planet. 

Speaking of aliens, the humans are (of course) not alone on Nova Prime; they find themselves hunted by an alien race known as the Ursas. Like sharks to blood, Ursas track humans through the pheromones released when the body feels afraid. It is up to the rangers, an elite fighting force, led by Kitai’s father General Cypher Raige (Will Smith) to protect civilization from this dangerous threat. As we quickly find out, Cypher is a living legend in Nova Prime. He was made commander of the ranger force after being the first human to successfully “ghost”, when a person can stop their fear response, thus making them invisible to the Ursas. Because of his talent, Cypher is constantly away from home, leading the rangers in battle against the Ursas. This absence creates a strained relationship between father and son.

When Kitai becomes upset after learning he may not be cut out to be a ranger like his father, Cypher decides to bond with his son and bring him on his last mission before retirement. The mission involves taking a captured Ursa to another planet to help rangers practice ghosting. As the mission gets underway, however, the ship hits an asteroid storm and must make a crash landing on the closest planet, Earth. The ship breaks apart in Earth’s atmosphere, leaving Kitai and Cypher as the only survivors; though, Cypher is severely injured. In order to save his dad and get them off of Earth, Kitai must single-handedly maneuver through Earth’s jungle-like environment to find a signaling device located in another part of the wreckage, while also avoiding the freed Ursa.

If you are looking for a fantastic science-fiction movie, showing what Earth will be like after humanity leaves, this is not the movie for you. In fact, the movie’s action could have taken place on any habitable planet. There are no visual references to recognizable places on Earth and besides baboons, even the animals are different (I don’t believe there are currently 30 ft. eagles on our planet). I kept waiting for a shot of an overgrown New York City, or something that would give me the realization that this is Earth, but unfortunately that never happened. Shymalan neglects the interesting idea of an overgrown Earth, which could provide stunning (even chilling) visuals, and instead focuses on a random jungle and active volcano.

I was also extremely disappointed by the visual effects. For such a high-budget film, the scenery looked more like an episode of the recently canceled TV show Terra Nova than a summer blockbuster. The colors of the jungle didn’t pop and instead faded into the background along with everything else. Bad visual effects are a death sentence for any science-fiction film, especially one that called for so much of it.  The scenes inside the “high-tech” ship were so bad, they made me cringe. Even the animals were second-rate. I’ve seen Life of Pi, Hollywood, I know you can do better.  

Not only were the visuals poor, but the storyline was boring, anti-climactic, and full of plot holes. For example, Cypher tells Kitai that everything on Earth has evolved to kill humans so he needs to be extra careful. Once Kitai starts off on his mission, however, nothing really tries to kill him except a leech. In fact, the huge eagle I mentioned earlier saves him. I also couldn’t figure out why the rangers were using swords to kill giant aliens in hand-to-hand combat. What happened to guns and missiles that could attack from further distances? Apparently Earth has evolved to kill humans, but humanity has devolved to using swords (or maybe I missed the explanation for this in Jaden’s opening monologue).

The only, and I repeat only, glimmer of hope in this terrible film is Jaden Smith. He has the potential to be a talented actor and really seemed to give his heart to the role. The emotional scenes with his father were powerful and I was able to take a break from hating the movie to focus on a decent performance. Will Smith, however, had the most listless performance of his entire career. It almost seemed he was tanking his role in the film to make Jaden look better (at least that’s what I’m telling myself). I realize Cypher is supposed to lack emotions and be a tough guy, but the Will Smith I know could make even that look good. After Earth also loses significant points for relegating Sophie Okonedo (Hotel Rwanda) to about five minutes of screen time. Her talent is completely wasted on this role. 

If you couldn’t already tell, I do NOT suggest you rush out to theaters to see After Earth, or even rush to Redbox when it comes out on DVD. Apparently Smith wants to turn this idea into a franchise, complete with sequels, videogames, and a TV show. However, I know I won’t be lining up to see any of it. On the bright side, congratulations John Travolta. It looks like Battlefield Earth has competition for the worst movie with “Earth” in its title. 

My Review: D-/F 

Note: For a GOOD movie with “Earth” in its title, check out the indie sci-fi hit, Another Earth, starring Brit Marling. It’s a great film. 

*I actually enjoyed The Village AND Lady In The Water.

After Earth Trailer

The Hangover Part III

 

I wish Hollywood would learn to leave well-enough alone, especially in the case of great movies like The Hangover (2009). The Hangover is easily one of the most hysterical and original comedies of the past decade. Director Todd Phillips expertly crafted a non-linear storyline, full of hilarious characters and debaucherous situations. With the great box office and critical success of this “one-off” film, the studio (of course) decided to expand the concept into a trilogy. Unfortunately, like many other sequels, parts II and III of The Hangover series are so bad that they almost make me forget the brilliance of the first film. Not to mention, it’s pretty disappointing when the funniest part of a comedy is its poster (I think the reference to Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 is hilarious).

I went into The Hangover Part III with the hope that it would at least be better than The Hangover Part II. After all, it wouldn’t take much. Sadly, Part III is just as unoriginal as its predecessor. While it doesn’t follow the same flashback-esque storyline as the first two films, I don’t think there is a more formulaic plot than: someone takes money from drug kingpin, kingpin wants money back so he takes a loved one for collateral until his money is returned  (Yawn). Part III is also the darkest movie in the franchise. As an animal lover, I don’t find many key “comedic” scenes funny, such as the decapitation of a giraffe by a highway overpass (as seen in the trailer) and the suffocation of a rooster that Mr. Chow uses in cockfights. It is bizarre that a movie franchise, which made its millions on light, crude humor, would end as a dark “comedy”.

Unlike the other two films, The Hangover Part III focuses mostly on Mr. Chow and Alan. In the wake of his father’s sudden death, Alan (Zach Galifianakis) has gone off of his medication and is spiraling out of control. Phil (Bradley Cooper), Stu (Ed Helms), and Doug (Justin Bartha) decide to stage an intervention and drive Alan to a treatment facility in order for him to get the help he needs. Meanwhile, Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong) breaks out of a Thai prison and escapes back to North America to retrieve the gold he stole from drug kingpin Marshall (John Goodman).

Before the Wolfpack reaches Alan’s treatment facility, they are captured by Marshall’s goon squad and interrogated about their “friend” Mr. Chow. However, Marshall quickly realizes the fastest way to Chow is through the Wolfpack, so he keeps Doug as collateral and sets Phil, Stu, and Alan on a mission to track down his gold and, of course, bring him Leslie Chow.

I don’t enjoy giving any film starring the extremely talented Zach Galifianakis, Ed Helms, and Bradley Cooper a bad review. They are three of my favorite actors and I hate that their comedic talents are so underutilized in this film. On a positive note, they squeezed as much humor as they possibly could out of a dark script and, like in the other two movies, the three actors’ fraternal chemistry is the best part of the film; it wouldn’t surprise me if they were all best friends in real life. Unfortunately, this camaraderie will only get you so far.

While I normally enjoy watching Ken Jeong onscreen, many of his scenes in this film are so over-the-top, they aren’t funny, which is more a criticism of Phillip’s poor script than Jeong’s performance. These scenes perfectly illustrate the way in which The Hangover Part III tries to be hilarious, but instead falls flat. For example, towards the end of the film, Mr. Chow parachutes out of Caesar’s Palace screaming about his love of cocaine; hint: this is supposed to be funny. I was surprised Phillips didn’t have him crash into Vegas’ Eifel Tower, as another attempt at cheap laughs.

As always, John Goodman and Melissa McCarthy were great in their supporting roles. McCarthy stole the scenes she was in, and played a quirky love interest for Galifianakis’ Alan. Although Goodman was also good in the role of a vengeful drug lord, any actor could have played this role. One exciting guest appearance, and an interesting trivia fact, is the reappearance of Carlos (the baby from the first film), who Jade (Heather Graham) has renamed Tyler. “Tyler” is played by the same child actor (Grant Holmquist) from the first film, though he is now about four years old. How cute is that?

If the filmmakers behind The Hangover Part III were trying to make the film’s content so disappointing that audiences wouldn’t want a Part IV, they succeeded. While I’m sure it will have a successful opening weekend, don’t let box office numbers fool you. Part III is by no means comparable to the original film, and will actually leave you with a bad taste in your mouth in regards to The Hangover franchise. Unlike Hollywood, leave well-enough alone and go see something else this Memorial Day weekend. 

**If you DO decide to see the film, make sure you stay a bit through the credits in order to see a scene that will certainly make you nostalgic for the first film.**

My Review: D+

The Hangover Part III

Star Trek Into Darkness Review

There are some films that are worth the price of admission; J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek Into Darkness is certainly one of them. The long-awaited sequel to the brilliant Star Trek (2009) is just as good as you hoped, maybe even better. It is far more cheeky, energetic and action-packed than the first film, and the villain is one of the best I have seen on film in a long time. Although I am not a diehard Trekkie, I actually started to feel like I was after I left the theater! I loved the humorous references to the earlier series/films (at least the references I understood/were explained by the man beside me) and appreciated Abrams’ efforts to make Star Trek fans cheer from the audience. After all, it’s always a fun movie experience when you see a film with enthusiastic viewers. Bottom line: you don’t need to be a Trekkie (or Trekker) to enjoy this film. The brilliance of Abrams’ Star Trek reboot is that it appeals to everyone. 

While you CAN forego the 3D aspect of the Star Trek experience, be sure NOT to miss it in IMAX. It is certainly worth the surcharge since J.J. Abrams shot over 30 minutes of footage using 65 mm film. It wasn’t converted in post-production and you WILL get the bang for your buck. When you’re already super excited for a movie, there’s no better sight for a movie nerd than when a movie opens up to showcase its extra IMAX space. Not to mention the sound is incredible as well.

Out of respect for J.J. Abrams’ veil of secrecy over his projects, and the fact I don’t want to ruin the film’s many surprises, my summary of Star Trek Into Darkness will be short. That being said, please don’t read spoilers about the film before you go! Believe me, you will want to be surprised and the film will play much better if you are.  

The cold open of the film begins with James Kirk (Chris Pine) and Leonard “Bones” McCoy (Karl Urban) running from an indigenous tribe on a volcanic (not Vulcanic) planet.  The USS Enterprise has been sent to save the inhabitants from an apocalyptic volcanic eruption; however, the crew is commanded not to let the people see them interfering. After all, the civilization has yet to invent the wheel. What will they think when they see a giant spaceship?

Meanwhile, Spock’s (Zachary Quinto) mission to cool down the volcano goes awry and he is stuck in the eruption zone. Although Spock is prepared to give his life to save the planet, Kirk breaks protocol and saves him, while also revealing the Enterprise to the indigenous people. After a completely logical mission report from Spock reveals Kirk broke the Federation’s Prime Directive, the Enterprise is removed from Kirk’s command and Kirk is demoted (putting a huge damper on the Spock/Kirk bromance). That is, until the villainous John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) wreaks havoc on a Federation facility in London. Due to spoilerish circumstances, Kirk must rally the Enterprise crew to find Harrison and bring him to justice.

Like in the first film, the acting in Star Trek Into Darkness is top-notch. Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto are perfectly cast as Kirk and Spock. They play their roles with incredible humor and sincerity, which makes for an entertaining movie experience. Abrams also makes sure to use the supporting cast for levity when the action starts to get dark. These actors, especially Zoe Saldana (Uhura), Simon Pegg (Scotty), John Cho (Sulu), and Karl Urban (Bones) provide some of the funniest moments in the film and make many awesome references back to the original Star Trek series.

Last but certainly not least is Benedict Cumberbatch’s performance as John Harrison. As I said before, John Harrison is the best villain to hit theaters in a long time. Cumberbatch’s booming voice and mysterious demeanor make his character as interesting as he is scary. At many points in the movie, I even found myself rooting for him instead of the Enterprise crew! Blasphemy, I know.

Despite the budding romance between Spock and Uhura, the real emotion in this movie is centered around Spock and Kirk’s “bromance”. From the very beginning of the film, the audience is shown how much each character values their relationship. This theme of friendship is weaved through each scene, finally culminating in a historic moment in the third act. Believe me, it is the most memorable scene of the film and one you will talk about immediately after you leave the theater. 

The ONLY complaint I have with Star Trek Into Darkness is that it ends a little too abruptly. Having such a fantastic villain, it would have been nice to see an even bigger fight scene than what is shown. It almost felt that Abrams realized his movie was running too long, and decided the climax was where he should make edits. Though I enjoyed the level of jealousy she incited in Spock, Abrams could have easily cut Carol Marcus (Alice Eve) in order to add more time for the “showdown scene”.

Regardless of whether or not you are a Trekkie, Star Trek Into Darkness is certainly a movie you need to see opening weekend. The film’s visuals are amazing, especially in IMAX, and Michael Giacchino’s score gives me goosebumps every time I hear it. Not to mention, the longer you go without seeing the movie, the more prone you are to hearing spoilers! Although it will probably be awhile before the next Star Trek movie begins filming, I will sleep peacefully tonight knowing Abrams’ next project, Star Wars, is in brilliant hands. 

My Review: A

The Great Gatsby: Just As Good As I Hoped!

Ever since I saw the trailer for Baz Luhrmann’s (Moulin Rouge) new film The Great Gatsby, I have been anxiously awaiting its May 10, 2013 release. Being that May 10 is also my birthday, is it bad that I was more excited to see the film than to celebrate my birthday?  After all, not only is F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby an American classic, but star Leonardo DiCaprio (Titanic) is one of the best actors working today, and Luhrmann, with his whimsical, over-the-top style is one of my favorite directors. Thankfully I was NOT disappointed. The Great Gatsby, so far, has been my favorite film of the year (though I am a sucker for exaggerated Baz Luhrmann productions… and Leo). Not to mention, this is certainly the best Gatsby film to date.

While the film sticks very closely to many scenes in the book, die-hard Gatsby fans (and movie critics) may be a little turned-off by the 3D effects, “chaotic” camera movement, and modern music. However, these are some of the elements that I enjoyed the most and what helps define it as a Baz Luhrmann film. I really appreciate directors who bring their own style to a production, and like Tim Burton, Luhrmann certainly has his own identifiable style. As shown through his previous movies, like Moulin Rouge and Romeo + Juliet, Luhrmann excels at bringing older stories into the modern day. Sweeping camera movements give his films the epic quality they deserve while also helping the audience feel they have been transported back in time. It’s interesting that most of his films center around tragic love stories.

For all of you who were not forced to read The Great Gatsby in English class, here is a quick synopsis of the plot. The story begins in 1922 with our narrator, Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire). He is a bond salesman, who recently moved to a small cottage in West Egg (Long Island), a fictional neighborhood of the nouveau riche. Carraway knows no one in the area, except for his cousin Daisy (Carey Mulligan), who lives across the water in the uppity, rich East Egg community with her philandering husband Tom (Joel Edgerton).

Carraway’s loneliness is only compounded when he sees the extravagant parties thrown by his rich, yet mysterious neighbor, Jay Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio), in his Xanadu-esque mansion; anyone who is anyone drives out to West Egg each weekend for these parties. Finally, one morning Carraway is delighted to find a man at his door holding a personal invitation to one of Gatsby’s parties. As he comes to find out, however, no one ever receives an invitation Gatsby’s parties, they just show up. Why would Gatsby take the time to personally invite him? Was this a nice, neighborly gesture or does Gatsby have ulterior motives? Although the book has been out for almost a century, and you may already know the answers to these questions, I will keep the spoilers in this review to a minimum. However, I will suggest that you not only see this film opening weekend, but also read the novel. I remember enjoying The Great Gatsby when I read it in high school, but this time when I read it, I LOVED it.

Perhaps the most entertaining aspects of the film were its mind-blowing scenery, set design, and costumes (designed by Luhrmann’s wife Catherine Martin). These elements make you feel as though you are living in the roaring ‘20s along with the characters. It’s amazing that the movie was filmed in Sydney, Australia and not New York City. As opposed to many other “3D” films that are converted to 3D in post-production, Luhrmann shot The Great Gatsby with actual 3D camera lenses. This adds incredible life and depth to the film. Though cheesy, I even enjoyed the way Luhrmann projected written representations of Fitzgerald’s words onto the screen, giving the book’s written words the nod they deserve.

Not only is the production of the film fantastic, but the acting is extraordinary as well. Each role was expertly cast from an all-star roster of actors. Unfortunately, some of the actors, mainly Isla Fischer (Confessions of a Shopaholic) and Jason Clarke (Zero Dark Thirty), who play Myrtle and George Wilson, are only used in a few scenes, though their roles are pivotal to the storyline. Hopefully we will see more of them in the DVD’s deleted scenes.

While Tobey Maguire was the person I was least excited about in the film, his portrayal of Nick Carraway was spot on. Maguire excels at providing the film with Carraway’s sarcastic narration, while also knowing when to fade into the background of the scene and just react. Additionally, Carey Mulligan was the perfect Daisy to DiCaprio’s Gatsby. I really enjoyed her alluring depiction of Daisy, full of dramatic glances and gesticulations. Also, don’t miss Joel Edgerton as Tom (Daisy’s husband). Though the movie doesn’t give Tom as much “screen time” as the book, Edgerton ensures the character and his motivations fit in perfectly with the abridged storyline; it didn’t feel as though we were missing critical pieces of his story.

Probably the most surprising and brilliant casting, however, was the role of Jordan (Elizabeth Debicki), who was even better on screen than in the book. Debicki encompassed the roaring ‘20s through her mannerism and overall look. Every time she entered a scene, she commanded my attention. Last (but not least), is Leonardo DiCaprio, who is easily the best Gatsby we have seen on-screen (sorry, Robert Redford). He was the heart of the movie with his emotional portrayal of Jay Gatsby. The way DiCaprio expertly shows his emotional range, from anxious to sad to enraged will be a real treat for audiences. Not to mention, Luhrmann even uses a hilarious firework explosion to finally reveal DiCaprio to the audience; he knows who people are there to see.

Another feature of the movie that deserves its own article, much less paragraph in my review, is the film’s fantastic music. Much like Moulin Rouge, The Great Gatsby soundtrack features songs from modern artists, such as Jay-Z (who also produced the soundtrack), Beyoncé, Florence and the Machine, and Jack White (to name a few). The most haunting song on the soundtrack, however, is Lana Del Rey’s “Young and Beautiful”. This is the “love song” of the film that filters through many of the scenes involving Daisy and Gatsby. If you can’t tell already, the Gatsby soundtrack (especially “Young and Beautiful”) is in heavy rotation on my iPod.

Bottom line: seeing Baz Luhrmann’s, The Great Gatsby, in theaters is an event in itself; almost like a stage performance. If you’re a fan of Moulin Rouge and The Great Gatsby, I think you will be thoroughly entertained. Not to mention, the film is a great way to start off Hollywood’s blockbuster summer. Let me know what you thought of the film in the comments below. Did it live up to its hype?

My Grade: A+
 

The Great Gatsby Trailer

Arthur Newman Review

Arthur Newman, written by Becky Johnston (Seven Years in Tibet), is one of those independent films that you will moderately enjoy, but ultimately forget about in a few weeks. Not because the film is fundamentally bad, but because it loses steam (as well as its charm) in the third act. The film’s interesting spin on an overdone concept – middle-aged protagonist with a lackluster life decides to change things up and start anew – is left in the dust and the plot unfortunately reverts back to type. Thankfully, the extremely talented Emily Blunt (The Devil Wears Prada) and Colin Firth (The King’s Speech) are there to make the disappointing ending a little easier to handle.

Colin Firth plays Wallace Avery, a straight-laced Fed-Ex floor manager who is depressed about his boring, unfulfilled life. He has a bland relationship with his girlfriend (Anne Heche) and is estranged from his adolescent son. Desperate for change, Avery decides to do what any normal person would do, fake his own death and buy a new identity, Arthur J. Newman.

“Arthur Newman” is not as boring as Wallace Avery; in fact, Arthur is a waspy golf pro who is on his way to a golf course in Terre Haute, Indiana for a new job. Before Arthur/Wallace gets to his destination, however, he meets a free-spirited woman named Mike (Emily Blunt), who has significant baggage of her own. In fact, Mike is also living under an assumed name and running from her dark past. What are the odds?

After Wallace saves Mike’s life from an apparent drug overdose, the two lost souls set out on a road trip to Indiana and along the way develop an intriguing relationship. Things only get weirder (and more interesting) when the couple decides to take identity thievery to a new level. They break into people’s homes when they are gone, dress in their clothes, and assume their imagined personas. Only through these “characters” can Mike and Wallace connect both emotionally and physically.

 


What develops is a quirky love story that is unfortunately derailed by the writer’s change in tone. Johnston abandons much of the interesting identity theft story, and starts to equally focus on Wallace’s abandoned girlfriend and son. I would have appreciated that whole subplot cut, to make room for more character development between Wallace and Mike; by the end of the film, it is hard to discern the characters’ final motivations.  Nevertheless, I could watch Emily Blunt and Colin Firth in a movie together any day. This is certainly a film that requires likeable actors to engage the audience in a weird adventure. If not for their fantastic acting skills, and surprisingly great chemistry, I certainly wouldn’t have enjoyed Arthur Newman as much as I did.

Though I wish Arthur Newman had stayed its quirky course, I did enjoy many aspects of the film. After all, who doesn’t enjoy seeing Queen Victoria and King George VI as co-romantic leads. However, due to the disappointing third act, I certainly wouldn’t suggest you rush out to theaters to see the film. This is definitely a rainy-day rental.

My Grade: B-/C+

Arthur Newman Trailer

The Reluctant Fundamentalist Review

The Reluctant Fundamentalist, a film that is seemingly about the radicalization of a “westernized” Muslim against his adopted country, is certainly timely. After all, following the Boston Marathon bombing, many Americans asked, “How could “Americanized” citizens commit such a horrific crime?” However, due to the scattered plot and the inability to connect with the main character, I left the theater feeling more disappointed than enlightened. In all honesty, I’m still confused about what happened in the third act. Either that, or I was too bored to care.

The “reluctant fundamentalist” in this film is Changez Khan (Riz Ahmed), a Pakistani man who moves to the United States in the late 1990s to attend college. In the film’s present day, however, he is back in Lahore, Pakistan, teaching controversial, bordering on inciting, issues in a University. When an American professor is kidnapped, suspicious eyes fall on Changez and his students. In an effort to mitigate the situation, Changez decides to meet with American reporter Bobby Lincoln (Liev Schreiber). Using an annoyingly clichéd plot device, Changez tells the story of his adult life to Lincoln in flashbacks, asking him to hold his judgment until the end of the story.

Through these flashbacks, we learn that after college, Changez took a job on Wall Street at a top financial firm, Underwood-Sampson. His cunning, at times ruthless, business skills quickly catch the eye of his boss (Kiefer Sutherland), which helps Changez rise through the ranks and become an associate at the firm. When Changez meets and falls in love with Erica (Kate Hudson), everything in his life appears to be going right. That is, until the events of 9/11 change everything.

This is where the movie loses me. Throughout the film I didn’t find Changez to be a particularly likeable character. He comes off as self-absorbed and shallow, taking a job that requires him to fire people from companies to increase profit (think George Clooney in Up In The Air). After 9/11, however, the film wants you to feel sorry for Changez by showing a divergence from his American identity. The problem, however, is that the filmmaker never makes it completely obvious what caused this fundamental change. Was it the few instances we see of racial discrimination? A film about racial discrimination following 9/11 would make for an interesting movie, however, in The Reluctant Fundamentalist, it just didn’t work. Mostly because the discrimination, at times, didn’t seem to be discrimination at all and was merely payback for the outcome of an insensitive job. For example, when Changez is called “Osama” by a man in Georgia, it seemed to be less about his ethnicity and more about the fact he just fired so many people.

Even though I disliked the storyline, I did enjoy Ahmed’s performance in the film. He is a great actor and did the best he could to make his character interesting. I only wish we could have seen more of his relatable side. The other standout in the film was the perfectly cast Kiefer Sutherland. He brings his Jack Bower furrowed brow to many scenes and was completely believable in the role. Warning, if you’re a Kate Hudson fan, I wouldn’t see this movie just because she’s in it. Unfortunately, her role is poorly written, one-dimensional and at times annoying. Her role could have easily been cut to make the film a little shorter.

Although The Reluctant Fundamentalist had the potential to be great, it flounders pretty quickly, and ultimately crashes and burns in the third act. It’s never a good thing when you come out of a movie and can’t quite grasp what you just watched, nor do you care to try to analyze it with friends. If you’re looking for a drama to see this weekend, check out The Impossible (available on Netflix, RedBox, and On Demand) instead.

My Review: D+

The Reluctant Fundamentalist Trailer

Pain and Gain Review

Pain and Gain, directed by Michael Bay (Armageddon), is the most outrageous true story I have ever heard, much less seen on film. In fact, it is hard to believe it took Hollywood this long to make the story into a movie. Seriously, the level of absurdity is so high, the first thing I did when I got home from the screening was Google the true story. I was convinced that there was no way this could all be real. After all, I surely would have seen this on a special episode of Dateline, right? Wrong. Unfortunately for the real people involved, mostly everything in the film is true; there doesn’t need to be major embellishments for the sake of Hollywood (and the explosion-loving Michael Bay). That being said, it is great to see Bay leave behind the big-budget (low-on-story, high-on-explosions) Transformers films and return to a movie with interesting characters and an entertaining script like his earlier works, The Rock and Armageddon.

Pain and Gain is billed as a true crime-action-dramedy, and it certainly is all of these things. Most of the comedic elements are genuinely funny and it is nice to see a film that doesn’t give away all of the funniest scenes in the trailer. I especially loved The Rock’s selection of Jesus-loving t-shirts and Mark Wahlberg’s jorts. Did I mention the film takes place in 1995? However, despite the humor, be prepared for a dark turn in the middle of the second act that sets the stage for some pretty extreme (and outrageous) violence. When this macabre, Fargo-esque story began to develop, I realized that maybe this isn’t the type of story I should be laughing at. After all, real people lost their lives. Should we really be enjoying a story that is this sinister?

The film opens on Daniel Lugo (Mark Wahlberg), a white-collar ex-con turned gym manager/personal trainer who is hired by Sun Gym in Miami to infuse new blood into the facility. In only a few months, Lugo transitions the gym from a geriatric-centered facility into a mecca for bodybuilders and other fitness-obsessed gym rats. However, this early success isn’t enough for Lugo; he believes he is meant for more, both personally and financially. When Lugo attends a self-help seminar led by Johnny Wu (Ken Jeong), an eccentric motivational speaker, he becomes convinced that the only way to achieve his distorted vision of the American Dream is to take control of his life and become a “do’er” instead of a “don’ter”.

This new “can-do” mentality leads Lugo to develop a fool-proof (ha!) get-rich-quick scheme with the help of fellow bodybuilders Adrian Dorbal (Anthony Mackie) and the recently paroled, ultra-religious Paul Doyle (Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson). The trio decides to kidnap a wealthy, yet crooked, personal training client named Victor Kershaw and extort all of his money and assets. As you can probably imagine, things do not go according to plan, which leads to an insane sequence of events that you’ll have to see for yourself.

Unlike some of Bay’s recent movies, Pain and Gain has a great cast with no weak links. Although Mark Wahlberg (Boogie Nights) gained 40 lbs of muscle to play Lugo, the character surprisingly requires a more mental and emotional performance than physical. We see Wahlberg expertly transform his character from a man trying to capture his piece of the American Dream to a full-fledged sociopath. Ed Harris (A Beautiful Mind) is also perfectly cast in the role of a private detective, sent to investigate the “Sun Gym Gang” and their influx of money. The two standout performances of the film, however, were Rebel Wilson (Bridesmaids) and Dwayne Johnson (Fast Five). As always, Wilson steals every scene she is in. She is so hilarious that it almost makes up for the annoyingly misogynistic scenes in the film that made me roll my eyes; I only wish she were in the movie more. Johnson also delivers my favorite performance of his career. He plays Doyle, the Jesus-loving, ex-drug addict, with such uncharacteristic tranquility, it is interesting to watch; well, that is, when he isn’t being manipulated into hurting people.

Although the film does run a bit too long (129 minutes) and definitely has its slower moments, I was entertained and I think you will be too. Though I don’t know that I will watch it again, it is certainly an unbelievable story that everyone will enjoy talking about when you leave the theater. Bottom line: this isn’t an Oscar winner by any means, but if you are looking for a fun, entertaining movie to start off your weekend, check out Pain and Gain.

My Review: B

 

Pain and Gain Trailer

Review of 42

42, written and directed by Brian Helgeland (L.A. Confidential), tells the true story of baseball legend Jackie Robinson’s (played by Chadwick Boseman) struggle to break the color barrier in professional baseball. As foreshadowed in the title (42 was Robinson’s baseball jersey number), the film is not a complete biopic. It instead focuses on the difficult years from 1945-1947 when Robinson was called up from the Negro baseball league to play for the all-white Brooklyn Dodgers. The Dodgers’ executive, Branch Rickey (Harrison Ford), chose Robinson because he was a tough player who could be the pioneer for integration in major league baseball. Rickey’s only request was that Robinson maintain his cool even when faced with angry crowds shouting nasty, racist things; as hard as it may be, Robinson needed to set the example.

If you are interested in learning more about Jackie Robinson the man, beware. 42 focuses primarily on the racism Robinson faced during his rookie year with the Dodgers, not on the story of his entire life.  Robinson had to deal with prejudice not only from the public but amongst teammates, umpires, and the opposing team. One scene in particular shows the manager of the Philadelphia Phillies screaming racial epithets (including a Django Unchained level usage of the n-word) at Robinson for a good five minutes while he is up to bat. The hate-filled speech and Jackie’s inability to put the man in his place leads to one of the most upsetting scenes I’ve seen in a long time.  

The awe-inspiring bravery of Robinson to play in such a hostile environment, during a time when discrimination and segregation were the norm, is a worthy story that needs to be told. However, I would have appreciated getting to know a little more about the man himself.  Were there other conflicts in his life besides battling racism? I would have liked to see 42 take an approach more like A League of Their Own, where the conflict involving discrimination in baseball is expertly woven throughout the plot while still allowing the audience to learn more about the main characters. For example, along with sexism, the women in A League of Their Own had to deal with their own personal struggles (relationships, death, etc...). 42, however, portrays Robinson more as a flawless hero than a real person. In fact, there is only one scene where we see Jackie finally break down because he cannot fight back against his detractors. 

Despite the fact that Robinson isn’t fully developed in the film, Boseman does a fantastic job in the role. He plays Robinson with as much emotion as the script allows; I only wish I could have seen more of his emotional range. Boseman is totally believable as a baseball player. At times I forgot that I was watching an actor and thought I was watching an actual professional. Harrison Ford also does a great job playing Branch Rickey. The wise advice and constant support Rickey gives Robinson throughout the film is extremely heartwarming. Not to mention Ford’s over-the-top, cartoonish performance and fantastic one-liners provide the film some great comedic relief. Also, don’t miss John C. McGinley (Scrubs) as a hilarious baseball announcer. 

42 is definitely a film everyone should see, not only to appreciate the struggles of Jackie Robinson, but to appreciate all of the nameless people who also had to deal with discrimination. Though the plot was extremely predictable, you would have to have a cold heart not to be inspired and extremely appreciative of the sacrifices this man made in the quest for racial equality.    


My Review: B-

42 Trailer

Welcome to Jurassic Park...3D!!!

The second I heard that Steven Spielberg’s Jurassic Park was being re-released in theaters for its 20^th anniversary, I knew I had to be there opening day. Jurassic Park is not only one of my favorite action films, but it holds the distinction of being :gasp: the first PG-13 movie I ever saw in theaters.  Thankfully, the film is just as thrilling and awesome as ever; only this time it’s in 3D! It’s hard to believe that after all of these years, I still jump when the raptor’s head pops out at Ellie (Laura Dern) in the circuit breaker room and cringe when Alan (Sam Neill) and the children are climbing the electric fence. However, what shocked me the most was the moment I realized how crazy my parents were to allow me to see Jurassic Park in theaters when I was four years old. Maybe that is why I am still terrified to eat green Jell-O.

Everyone probably knows the premise of Jurassic Park, but here is a quick refresher. John Hammond (Richard Attenborough), an eccentric billionaire, uses dinosaur DNA found in fossilized mosquitoes to clone the animals and bring them back to life for his new theme park. However, due to a previous accident, Hammond’s investors insist he bring experts in to certify the park is safe before it can be officially opened. Hammond sends for Dr. Alan Grant (Neill), a paleontologist, and Dr. Ellie Sattler (Dern), a paleobotanist, while his investors bring Dr. Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum), a mathematician that specializes in the chaos theory. As soon as the group gets to the island, they are joined by Hammond’s grandchildren for a tour of the park.

Unbeknownst to them, Dennis (Wayne Knight), a disgruntled employee, has decided to escape the island with dinosaur embryos that he plans to sell to Hammond’s competitor. However, in order to take the embryos out of the facility, Dennis has to deactivate the park’s security system (including the electric fences). This allows many of the dinosaurs to get out of their enclosures and have free reign of the island, leading to a dangerous confrontation between man and dinosaur.

If you are a fan of Jurassic Park, definitely do not miss it in theaters for its 3D release.  Although I find 3D movies to be a bit gimmicky, Jurassic Park takes the Titanic approach and uses the 3D to enhance the scenes, adding extraordinary amounts of depth to the picture. Not to mention, just when you think Jurassic Park can’t be any more terrifying, try watching the velociraptor kitchen scene in 3D. I would also recommend that you see the film in IMAX, though my suggestion is more about sound than picture. Jurassic Park has one of the best soundtracks in cinematic history and I loved being able to hear the score and sound effects at an IMAX level. Watch out for the raptor shrieks, though. I’m still having nightmares about that.

My Review: A+ (it’s freakin’ Jurassic Park!)

  **What are your favorite moments from Jurassic Park? Tell us below! Extra points if it’s in gif form. Here is my favorite Jurassic Park gif to start us off…**

 

The Place Beyond the Pines Review

The Place Beyond the Pines, directed by Derek Cianfrance (Blue Valentine), is an epic film that depicts the complicated relationship between fathers and sons and its effects over generations. It is one of those movies you want to discuss immediately when you walk out of the theater. Not because it is the best movie you have ever seen, but because the plot doesn’t follow the typical Hollywood formula; it is unique and at times very surprising.  One twist in particular will make you gasp and whisper “WHAT?!” After the screening, I even went back and re-watched the trailer to make sure my shock was warranted. It was.

Cianfrance takes an ambitious risk with the content of this film. Without giving too much away, the plot can be broken down into three distinct parts—each is almost a movie in itself. While I appreciate this unique type of storytelling, the film is hurt by the fact that it is too long (over 2 hours) and at times felt like it was sacrificing character development by cramming too much into the plot. However, even with these criticisms, I can’t help but appreciate where the film took me morally and emotionally. It’s not every day that a film leaves you with such an impression.

Because I hate spoilers and try to make my reviews as spoiler-free as possible, it has proven difficult to write this review. I want audiences to be surprised and see The Place Beyond the Pines with few expectations. In fact, the film will resonate best if the audience knows as little as possible about the plot before going in. The one specific spoiler I will gladly divulge, for the sake of anyone who has longed to be picked up in the ocean while hearing “If you’re a bird, I’m a bird”, is that the film begins with a close-up of Ryan Gosling’s abs (Cianfrance really knows how to begin a movie). “Handsome Luke” (Gosling) is a tattooed stunt biker, who rides his motorcycle in a traveling carnival’s Globe of Death. Luke is the star of the show and can easily get girls in every town. It isn’t until he meets Romina (Eva Mendes), however, that things change.

Romina is Luke’s “girl” in Schenectady, New York and as it turns out, gave birth to his child during the year it took him to circle back to town with the show. In an effort to not repeat the sins of his own father, Luke decides to quit the show and remain in town to be with his family. The only problem is, Romina lives with another man who can provide for her and her son, whereas Luke has barely any money to his name. In an effort to win back his family, Luke decides to rob banks and use his motorcycle expertise to escape the law. After many successful heists, the situation changes when Luke crosses paths with rookie policeman Avery (Bradley Cooper). THAT is all I can and will say.




The acting in The Place Beyond the Pines is what really makes the film successful. Gosling once again excels at playing the charming, yet conflicted bad boy who woos the audience’s sympathies despite his poor life choices. Gosling is the heart and soul of the film. He convincingly reveals his character’s aspiration to be the best father he can be despite the immeasurable odds against him. Not to mention, only Gosling can make a face tattoo look cool (I’m looking at you Mike Tyson). This film also features Bradley Cooper in his best role yet. His performance as a conflicted police officer, with his own personal demons, shows he is an actor that can consistently turn out solid performances. Because the theme of the film focuses on the relationship between fathers and sons, the roles of Eva Mendes and Rose Byrne were pretty expendable; any actress could have played the parts. The other standout supporting performances in the film were Ray Liotta, as a crooked cop, and Dane DeHaan (whose role I cannot reveal).

Along with the acting and plot twists, the cinematography in the film is top-notch. Especially wonderful was the tracking shot at the beginning of the film that follows Luke from his trailer, through the carnival, finally landing on the Globe of Death; this simple shot really sets the tone of the film. The audience feels like it is in the scene and not just passively observing the action. Another visually stunning scene involves Luke speeding down a rural road with the camera following him from above. This image brings your thoughts back to a critical line in the film, “If you ride like lightning, you’re going to crash like thunder.” I realized that by speeding away on his bike, Luke is not only trying to escape from police, but is also trying to escape from the personal struggles in his life.

The Place Beyond the Pines is an ambitious film that has the feeling of an Americana novel. While the film may drag at times, I can’t imagine anyone would leave the theater wanting their money back. If you hate spoilers like I do, I would definitely try to see this one as soon as possible.

My Score: B+/A-

The Place Beyond the Pines Trailer

Evil Dead Review

Fede Alvarez’s Evil Dead, a remake of Sam Raimi’s cult-classic The Evil Dead, is one of the best horror remakes of the past decade (though I don’t think that is saying much). In an era of Saw VI and Texas Chainsaw 3D, it was refreshing to see a film that embraces the (at times) ridiculous plot points and character choices present in horror movies (e.g. going into a creepy, dark basement alone). During many of the scenes, however, I wasn’t sure whether the movie was trying to be silly, or if it was actually that outrageous. By the time I saw the scene where a character is brutally stabbed and the others run to get water and sugar to help with his blood loss, I knew this had to be a joke. At least, that’s what I hope. It must also be noted that the film is not as scary as the trailer makes it out to be. I only jumped a couple of times, and the “scary” scenes were more gruesome than they were frightening. Though Evil Dead isn’t as terrifying as I had expected, true horror fans (especially fans of the original film) will not leave the theater disappointed.

Much like Raimi’s The Evil Dead, the remake begins with five college-aged students who decide to spend the weekend at an isolated cabin in the woods. However, in this version of the story the main character Mia (Jane Levy) is a drug-addict, who is using the cabin as a place to battle withdrawal under the watchful eye of her friends and brother. Because Mia almost died from a recent overdose, the group decides they will not leave the cabin until she has successfully sobered up. Unfortunately for them, the cabin has a history of demon possession. When one of the characters finds a variation of the Book of the Dead in the cellar, and of course reads aloud from the books pages, a powerful demon is awakened and the bloodbath begins.

I really enjoyed the inventive new premise of Evil Dead. The drug withdrawal storyline is a good way to tie the characters to the house just long enough for the demon to possess Mia. Additionally, it gives the characters an explanation for her erratic behavior (at least until others fall victim too). The film also gets points for being the goriest movie I’ve ever seen. In comparison to its low-budget predecessor, this film spares no expense when it comes to gruesome makeup and special effects. If you ever wondered what it would look like if someone licked an extra sharp box cutter, or cut off a limb with an electric carving knife, this is the movie for you. However, if you are a bit squeamish, you may want to skip this film (or at least prepare to shield your eyes). Full disclosure, I am not a big fan of gore and had to look away from the screen many times. Isn’t that the fun of a horror movie, though?

In terms of entertainment, Evil Dead was pretty solid. I love movies (horror movies especially) where you feel compelled to yell out to the characters on screen and tell them how stupid they are acting. However, due to the fact that I was underwhelmed by the lack of truly scary moments and that the ending carried on way too long, I wouldn’t suggest you run out to theaters to see it. This is definitely a movie you will enjoy via Netflix.
My Score: C

Evil Dead Trailer