Movie Review: Blade Runner

Hello from Ithaca, NY! I'm staying here with relatives for the week, and I'm bringing you this website's first review out of state.

Blade runner follows the story of Rick Decker, a "blade runner" tasked with finding and destroying replicants, or human-like robots with superhuman strength, speed and agility. When four replicants steal a ship and come to earth, Decker must track down all four of them and kill them.

The film goes has definite themes about the thin line between hyper-advanced robots and humans, and does so without forcing it. Ridley Scott (Alien), more or less cements his place in sci-fi film history with this movie.

Even though it has Harrison Ford, the acting is nothing special, this movie more gets its kicks from over-the-top blood and gore and cool special effects, both of which it presents to the audience by the truckload. It's everything I hate about modern cinema with its overt sexuality and flashy special effects, but it's still enjoyable.

The plot is fairly complex, I had to go back and think about some of the parts in order fully understand  it, and this part of it I liked. It definitely gets its roots from the American film noir period, which is something you don't see very often anymore.

Overall: 3 out of four stars. It represents what I hate about modern film, but it does it well.

Reference scale:
Man of Steel < Blade Runner < Star Wars

What's your favorite sci-fi movie? Comment below!

Movie Review: 12 Angry Men (1957)

I really liked Citizen Kane. But I would have to say that this movie competes for my favorite movie of all time.

12 Angry Men entails only one night, and it only uses five sets, with ninety percent of it's time spend in just one of them. It's on a small scale, but that doesn't make it an incredible film. The story follows twelve jurors, whose names are never given (except for two at the end of the film), who must decide the fate of an eighteen year old boy accused of murdering his father. With the death penalty as the consequence, the stakes are high. Although at the beginning the boy's fate seems clear, there is more to the case that as it first appears.

The acting is superb, it stars a cast that would go on to do work in movies like Pyscho, Patton, The Odd Couple, On the Waterfront, Breakfast at Tiffany's and more. The list goes on and on, but the acting in this movie from all twelve actors are still probably some of their best performances.

The movie never actually shows any of the court case, but as the movie goes on it reveals more and more about the case. If done wrong, this gimmick could be extremely annoying, but it's done correctly in this and keeps the audience interested throughout the film.

The plot never stops twisting, with surprising reveals and arguments. It even has a few good laughs, if you have the right sense of humor. It almost reminds me of Breakfast Club because of how few sets the use and the tone of the movie.

Overall: 4 out of four stars. Really enjoyable.

Reference scale:
Genre: Courtroom dramas
To Kill a Mockingbird < 12 Angry Men < Nothing

Genre: Favorite movies
Star Wars < 12 Angry Men < Citizen Kane

What's your favorite courtroom drama, in TV or in film? Comment below!

Documentry Review: The Battered Bastards of Baseball

It's impossible not to love this quirky story about an actor who starts an independent baseball team in a city abandoned by Major League baseball.

The documentary follows Bing Russel, a baseball player turned actor turned baseball team owner, who starts an independent baseball team in Portland, Oregon. The team is scrappy, but it has charm and charisma, and over the years as it grows the Major Leagues become jealous, and that's where it really gets interesting.

It's a really touching film, using mostly old footage of games and interviews to tell it's story. The editing and graphics are very well done. It has cool imagery and animation which it uses for transitions and as a way of giving information. The editing does a good job of working with limits of the footage, and avoids jump cuts quite cleverly by switching from wide angles to close ups.

It's funny in parts, sad in some parts, and inspiring in others. It's a really positive movie overall, I left it feeling good. It's great for a little pick-me-up, it's like Rocky in that it leaves you feeling good and like you can do anything. It talks about the American dream and what it means to fulfill it, and it puts a smile on your face. It's also comical at times, especially when they talk about the antics of the players.

With a movie like this, you can often times find it repetitive, but The Battered Bastards of Baseball doesn't do that. It keeps giving you new things to think about, sometimes moving so quick that you've barely finished processing what they were just talking about.

Overall: 3.5 out of 4 stars. It's fun, enjoyable and inspiring. If you have Netflix, you can stream it.

Reference scale:
The Sandlot < The Battered Bastards of Baseball < The Rookie

What's your favorite baseball movie? Let me know in the comments!

I'm Back

I'm back! I don't have a movie to review, but I'll post as soon as I can, hopefully later today.

Movie Review: Frozen

I feel like this movie, has so many people who are obsessed with it, that there are an equal number of people who feel obliged to hate it because to balance them out.

The movie follows the princess orphan and not-at-all cliche character of Anna, who must bring back summer after her magic sister Elsa freezes everything with her magic. Along the way she works with a large cast of character including another orphan (yes, there are three of them in this movie), a reindeer and a talking snowman.

I don't think that this film deserves all of the praise it gets. I also don't think it deserves all of the hate. It's a decent movie, it's just not that great.

The plot is filled with cliches, which gets a bit annoying when what you knew was about to happen happens a bunch of times during the course of the movie. It's so predictable that there's even one song per sequence.

The characters are cute and it did make me chuckle in a few places. It definitely tries to play off of nostalgia from movie like Lion King and... um... okay, just Lion King. In this, it does a good job. A lot of people are a fan of it's songs, not me personally but a lot of people like them. It's hard to hate it too much, it's just a kid's movie. It's not insultingly bad, like Smurfs 2 but it's just not too super as a movie if you ignore the intended age demographic.

A quick note before I give my overall and reference scale: This is my last post for a week. I'm going out of town and won't have internet access, so I'll post as soon as I can when I get back. I'll miss it, but I posted twice today and yesterday so I hope that will make it up to all you readers.

Overall: 2.5 out of 4 stars. It's cliched, but it's a kid's movie. That said, you could better spend that 102 minutes watching The Iron Giant.

Reference scale:

Tangled < Frozen < Wreck it Ralph

Movie Review: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

Part of what's great about this movie is how shocking some of it it is. It's not just "Wow! That ape is riding a horse" or "Wow! That ape is firing a gun!". It's "Wow! That ape is firing a gun while riding a horse!"

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes takes place ten years after the first movie. It has a very memorable opening, with a montage showing the fall of organized civilization, then smash cutting to a ECU of Caesar. The plot is mainly about the relations between the humans and the apes as some try to co-exist in peace and others want war. The plot is very twisty, you can never tell where it's going to go next. For this reason, this is the most information I can give you about it without spoilers.

I would like to point out that this is my first review of a "new" movie. I went to the local theater with one of my buddies and we watched it, and had a good time.

Andy Serkis gives by far the best performance in this movie, as Caesar. Do they give Oscars for people playing apes? The acting overall is okay, but like I said, Andy Serkis is a standout. The direction by Matt Reeves (known more for his TV work) is decent, not great. It does get a bit annoying when the apes open their mouths and try to talk, and when their using sign language. It just gets a bit awkward.

There is no shortage of action of suspense in this movie, with explosions, guns and huge, nicely choreographed fight scenes. There are moments that are touching, but also moments that make you feel like it was directed by Micheal Bay.

Overall: 3 out of 4 stars. It's a good movie, I would recommend seeing it while it is still in theaters. It's one of those movies that is best seen on a huge screen where you can see every detail.

Reference scale:
Planet of the Apes (2001) < Dawn of the Planet of the Apes < Rise of the Planet of the Apes

Web Series Review: Red vs. Blue

Oh my god. This show had me laughing harder than I have in a very long time.

This web series, created by Roosterteeth, parodies first person shooter style video games with a hilarious series. It follows the exploits of two groups of soldiers, one red and one blue as they face off in a battle to take a canyon. As one character point out, there's no value to the canyon, both sides are just there because the other side is and even if one side could win "[Y]ou would just have two bases in a canyon. Whoop-de-do."

It's half satirical, half screwball style is just a barrel of laughs. I honestly don't think I've laughed this hard since the first time I watched Airplane. All the characters are completely immature, but the show does it in a way that it doesn't seem forced.

There are a couple problems with it, one being the graphics. I find this excusable as the creators used the engine from a video game to create it so they didn't have much control over it. The second problem I have is the audio quality. It does tend to cut out and sound like it was made several years previous to when the series was made, but it doesn't take away from the quality of the jokes too much. My last beef, and the biggest, is the editing. The editing could of been a lot better, with awkward fade-outs and sound cuts.

It's still extremely funny, and I would go so far as to say that it is the best web series out there. Now, I haven't seen a ton of web series but this is by far my favorite.

Overall: 3 out of 4 stars. It's a farce on the modern gamer's world and connects with all of us, even if you don't play games.

Reference scale:
Riley Rewind < Red vs. Blue < Nothing

Note: Yes, I posted twice today. This is partially because I will be gone next week, so I'll put out extra while I can.

Movie Review: Planes, Trains and Automobiles

I love Steve Martin. I think he's a great actor who's capable of great work. Capable of great work. Capable.

 Planes, Trains and Automobiles is a road comedy with Steve Martin and John Candy. Steve Martin plays a businessman trying to get home for Thanksgiving during a winter storm. After he is stranded in Kansas by the airline, he tries various other ways of getting home for the holidays. He is unwillingly accompanied by a loudmouth shower curtain ring salesman played by John Candy.

The movie did have a few good laughs, but overall most of the jokes seemed either unfunny or forced. John Candy's character is just annoying, even when you're supposed to be on his side. The script for this movie could of been better, most of the humor was dull and unoriginal.

This movie is often compared to another movie I reviewed, Midnight Run because of the proximity in release date and type of movie. I would have to say that I found Midnight Run much more enjoyable than Planes, Trains and Automobiles. The acting, idea, and humor is better in Midnight Run. I didn't love Midnight Run but I think it was definitely a better movie. The only reason I would watch Planes, Trains and Automobiles over Midnight Run would be because they have Planes, Trains and Automobiles available for instant streaming on Netflix and not Midnight Run.

I will say that this movie had decent execution, given the flawed concept and script. The acting was okay, and the direction by John Hughes (The Breakfast Club, Ferris Buellers Day Off, Home Alone) was good.

Overall: 1.5 out of 4 stars. This movie couldn't of been a lot better, given the quality of the script among other things, but it's best isn't very good.

Reference scale:
(I don't know about any road movies worse than this) < Planes, Trains and Automobiles < Midnight Run

Movie Review: Smurfs 2

Wow, that was a really smurfing bad movie. See, I said "Smurf" instead of "f*ck". That's so funny, right? No? It's not? Not even it's the only joke in a two hour long movie?

I'm writing this post with a voice interpreter, because this movie caused me to involuntarily gouge my eyeballs out. If I hadn't been busy gouging my eyeballs out I would of torn off my ears, and I never want to hear the sound of Gargamel's cat's "voice" again.

The worst part about this piece of giraffe crap is that it took three things I like (Neil Patrick Harris, Hank Azaria and France) and made me hate them (although I may forgive Azaria when the next season of The Simpsons starts.)

There's so much to hate about this movie. The CGI is terrible, NPH gives what is arguably the worst performance of his career, and overall the acting is terrible. The CGI looks like a stoner did it after a week of sleepless nights. It fits in terribly with the live action portion of the film. This includes the smurfs themselves and Gargamel's cat which was my least favorite. I think that part of the time it was CGI and part of the time it was a real cat... I don't know, it just looked awful.

The plot is full of holes, basically Gargamel (not even sure I'm spelling it right. It's not worth checking.) needs the secret formula to make things into smurfs so he can take over the world by taking the "Smurf Essence" because then he can make an army of fake smurfs and use their essense to power his wand. It's not how dumb the plan is that upsets me... okay, maybe it is a little bit. Especially since we find out that he needs less than seven smurfs to get enough energy. Seriously, how is this guy a threat to the world? Anyway, the smurfs and whatever Neil Patrick Harris's character's name is need to stop him, blah blah blah. And this time, his son who they have named Blue (yes, they named their child Blue. BLUE!  ASDF ASA FHS GGNDGMH FHNF ZWERAR). And NPH's had daddy issues, blah blah blah.

These characters are so hard to connect to. I seriosly can't imagine a senario where I could give less craps about thier problems. There's one smurf who only talks about himself, and I get it, it's supposed to be funny. But here's the thing: IT'S NOT. For the whole movie I was wishing they would all just shut up. Character based humor isn't funny when you hate the characters.

Overall: 0 out of 4 stars. I hated every aspect of this movie. I'm not sure if there's anything they could of done to make me dislike it more. I'd rank it among my least favorite movies of all time.

Reference scale:
The Sandlot < Smurfs 2 < Batman and Robin

Movie Review: The King's Speech

I feel bad for Colin Firth. Because after this performance he can only go down from here.

The plot of The King's Speech follows the duke of York, and later king, George VI, or as he is referred to in the movie, Bertie. Bertie's main problem is that he has a crippling stutter that greatly inhibits his public speaking ability. As a member of the royal family and future king, this is a problem. After trying numerous other therapists, he seeks the help of Lionel Louge (Geoffrey Rush). Lionel uses a series of controversial methods to try prepare him for the movie's climax, the King's Christmas address on the edge of World War Two.

The element of this movie that stands out the most clearly is the acting talent. Colin Firth is stellar, and even won an Oscar for best acting. He shows the character extremely well, and makes up connect to his struggle. In my opinion, it was very deserving. Geoffrey Rush also gave a great performance, showing a wide range of expressions in a particularly difficult character.

The cinematography is beautiful, especially during one montage. Tom Hooper is a great director and you can identify his touch on the film. There is not an uninteresting scene in the whole movie, and I loved every performance from every actor.

I would say that this movie, despite it's R rating, is okay to show to kids. The reason it is rated R is because of one scene scene that comes about halfway through, where the main character cusses for the heck of it, and another similar scene toward the end. Just go online and find where they are ahead of time. If your kid enjoys movies, this is worth showing to them.

Overall rating: 4 out of 4 stars. I used to say that we haven't had a really good movie since 2003 (Lord of the Rings). I think that this movie proved me wrong. To be honest, I would be surprised if this didn't eventually make it's way onto the AFI Top 100.

Reference scale:
Lincoln < The King's Speech < Schindler's List

Documentary Review: Dogfights of the Future

At its worst, this movie is simply American military propaganda. At its best, it's really, really good American military propaganda.

Dogfights of the Future is a history channel documentary about the future of air combat. As it repeatedly tells you, it is based on diagnostic test about hypothetical future combat scenarios. It explores future air combat situations with awesome planes and technology. Is it accurate? Maybe. Is it awesome? Hell yeah!

It is pretty interesting, albeit biased and a bit far-fetched. You shouldn't go into this thinking that this is what the future is going to be like. It's a rough estimate at best, so don't take it too seriously. The real enjoyment in this is the action sequences and the sci-fi feel of the whole thing. The planes look like they came out of a Jude Watson novel, and the dogfight sequences are visually thrilling.

Something that did kind of annoy me about this movie is that they has a few animations that it shows over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. It's like they couldn't be bothered to create a new animation. They kind of just said "No. Let's use that one again. I don't care that we just showed it a minute ago." In particular there's on animation of planes appearing on the radar that gets shown at least a dozen times, I'd guess probably more.

My biggest problem with it, however, it not the repeated animation. My least favorite part of it is how blatantly it is propaganda. The American win every fight shown, and they are almost constantly talking about how far ahead the US is compared to other countries. They even refer to the other countries as, and I quote "the bad guys".

Overall: 2 out of 4 stars. It's worth checking out if you're into this kind of stuff, but at times it comes across as low-budget and arrogant.

Reference scale:
Beyond the Movie: Lord of the Rings < Dogfights of the Future < Indie Game: the Movie

You can check it out for free here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHdht7jdjSc

Movie Review: Midnight Run

It's hard to describe the genre of this movie. In one sense, it's a road movie. In another, it's a dark comedy. Some describe it as a chase movie. Still others call it a buddy movie. So I suppose this will be my first review of a dark road chase buddy comedy movie.

The plot follows Jack Walsh, a bounty hunter with high standards, and his capture, criminal Jonathan "the duke" Mardukas as they travel across the country. After Jack is offered $100 thousand to catch Mardukas, he sets out and gets him rather easily. Too easily. They get on a plane, but Mardukas has a panic attack, as he's afraid of flying. So they set off on an adventure across the country in order to get him from New York to LA. Along the way, their pursued by the FBI, the Chicago mob, and another bounty hunter. It turns into a darkly humorous and entertaining adventure.

It was funny at some parts, but it's not as funny as some people make it out to be. To me, most of the value in this movie comes in that it's a sort of character study between Jack and Mardukas. It's fun to watch their odd couple relationship go through it's ups and downs, as well as the way these ups and downs change both of them.

Robert de Niro gives a nice performance as Jack Walsh, as does Charles Grodin as Johnathan Mardukas. I was satisfied about the acting overall, nothing too special but it was good. Martin Brest as director was okay, I think some other directors could of done it better (he is best know for directing Beverly Hills Cop and, unfortunately, Gigli). I feel like it would be better if the screenplay was a little bit smarter and didn't rely so much on say the F-word every other second, but the writing did stay realistic.

Overall: 3 out of 4 stars. Though it was good, I was a bit disappointed. I think it had a good concept but the execution was a bit below par. I would say that it's a bit overrated.

Reference scale:
Grosse Point Blank < Midnight Run < In Bruges

Citizen Kane Talk (SPOLIERS; Citizen Kane Week: Day 3)

And so Citizen Kane Week comes to a close. (I decided not to review the documentary, I started it but then realized it was just an episode of a TV show). Today we're going to talk about the deeper elements of Citizen Kane, some of the lore that surrounds it and the overall effect on American cinema.

A quick note first: Citizen Kane has many layers and many ways to interpret them. This is how I see it. That said, let's start off with one of the more obvious questions. What was so important about that sled that Charles last words were about it? To me, it's that the sled represented what he could never have. He was incredibly wealthy and powerful and could by anything in the world, but he could of never had a childhood growing up with his parents. The sled was what Charles wanted more than all the statues and everything he had, because he could never have it.

Now I want to talk about some of the lore  that surrounds this film. It has a rich history, with lots of legend that surrounds it. For example, one account says that during filming, William Randolf Hearst arranged for a naked woman and a photographer to hide in wait in Orson Wells' hotel room in order to soil his reputation. Fortunately, someone warned him and Wells' spent the night elsewhere. Another bit says that in order to keep the execs off his back, Wells' started filming three days ahead of time when they were supposed to be doing camera tests. You can find a full list of these on the imdb web page for Citizen Kane.

Finally, let's talk about influence. It's hard to over state how much effect this has on modern film. For starters, it pioneered the deep focus technique, which puts all of the screen into focus. This gives the image a more 3D feel instead of being a flat screen. It also was the first movie to announce it' production studio, title and actors in an initial title card, which nowadays is industry standards. When looking at plot, at the time it was released, Citizen Kane probably had on of the most complex plots of the era. There are many interwoven subplots and layers, and that definitely has influence on the films of today.

So this brings Citizen Kane week to a close. I hope you enjoyed it. If you haven't already, go rent Citizen Kane and watch it. It's worth two hours of your time.

Movie Review: RKO 281 (Citizen Kane Week: Day 2)

Here's how you know that a movie has become one of the most influential in history: a movie is made about making that movie starring Victor Creed from X-men. That's what RKO 281 is. The name refers to the production code for Citizen Kane (RKO is the production studio, 281 is the production number).

I wouldn't recommend watching this before you watch Citizen Kane itself. There are many references to the film and as a result of that, spoilers. There's even one scene toward the end where Herman Mankiewicz (the co-writer of the movie) yells out spoilers to a passing crowd of moviegoers.

The plot follows Orson Wells as he comes to Hollywood, a "boy genius". He sets off to work almost immediately (the film has an uncomfortably short first act). He keeps this a secret for as long as he can, but when it gets out, William Randolph Hearst (on whom the movie is based) does everything in his power to try and stop it's release. Just like the film which it is about, it has several subplots. Unlike the film it's about, they are not smartly woven.

As a fan of Citizen Kane, I really enjoyed this movies tributes to it. The research was clearly done to make this film. Much of the lore that surrounds Citizen Kane was included in this film (example: Orson Wells found himself in an elevator with William Randolph Hearst the day before the film's release. He offered him tickets but Hearst refused. As Hearst was leaving the elevator, Wells called after him "Charles Foster Kane would of accepted!").

Now, if you haven't seen Citizen Kane or are not a fan of it, I would wholeheartedly say that this film is not for you. It is really for those who really can't get enough of Citizen Kane, who will lap this up like that little bit of ice cream that's melted in the bottom of the bowl while making the noise that Hannibal Lecter makes in Silence of the Lambs.

Overall: 2.5 out of 4 stars. It's a bit hard to connect with Wells' character with the way he is portrayed as a "perfect genius boy" and it does little to try and incorporate the audience that hasn't seen the movie before. Not all of the subplots are worked out together or are connected well. If you liked Citizen Kane, however, you'll enjoy it.

Reference scale:
Jobs < RKO 281 < Heart of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse.

Movie Review: Citizen Kane

I almost feel like I shouldn't be reviewing this. There are three main reasons I review things: first, to bring to light movies that you haven't seen or heard of, and everyone has obviously heard of Citizen Kane. Second is to give my opinion of their ratings an
d as this is widely regarded as the greatest film of all time, so you can guess what my rating is. Third is to recommend whether you should watch it or not. No duh. But it's a really great movie, so here you go.

The plot follows the life of Charles Foster Kane (Orson Wells), a man who's mother came across a fortune that was bequeathed unto him. He become an incredibly wealthy man who most notably runs the New York Inquirer. It follows his adventures and mishaps as he takes control of the company, marries twice, and goes in and out of politics. While he seems like an evil man at the beginning of the film, the more it moves along the more you connect with him and the more you realize he's good at heart.

It's full of wit and quotable dialogue, as well as stellar performances from all the actors. The plot is really interesting, the movie is almost like Memento in that it will show you one part of the movie with no context, but then the next sequence reveals how significant that scene was. In my opinion, if it wasn't Wells or a very small number of other directors that would be really annoying, but Wells weaves it into a epic of masterful storytelling.

The film is funny, it's dramatic, it's mysterious. I would have to say that it's my favorite film of all time to date. It keeps you captivated until the very last second. You really have to watch it to understand, but the more time that passes since I've watched it, the more I obsess over it and the more I want to just watch it all over again.

Overall: 4 out of 4 stars. No duh.

Reference scale:
Genre: Rich people movies
Wolf of Wall Street < Citizen Kane < Nothing

Genre: Great movies
Star Wars < Citizen Kane < Nothing

Side note: I think I'm going to make this into a short series for the week. I'll review the two documentaries I found about Citizen Kane tomorrow and Wednesday and on Thursday I'll take an in-depth look at the movie and it's influence on American cinema. If you don't want me to or really do want me to, let me know in the comments.

Documentary Review: Did God Create the Universe?

This documentary by Stephen Hawking explores the fundamental question of science vs. religion in the debate on the universes origin. In Hawking's words but narrated by Benedict Cumberbatch, it provides great insight onto a question that may never be answered. I think that this is the closest that we will come to an answer in my lifetime.

The forty five minute film is full of interesting and helpful analogies, amazing facts and best of all, Benedict Cumberbatch's voice. The narration and graphics really are wonderful, and they keep you interested throughout the duration of the film.

The documentary does a great job of explaining very complicated concepts with a combination of graphics and simple analogies. It takes the simplest first and then connects them to more and more complicated ideas. It finally climaxes with the strongest answer to the question that is the movie's title.

I wish that they could of made the whole thing longer, because while it is interesting it doesn't have the length or proper amount of material for wider recognition. I find this very unfortunate, but perhaps they will do some sort of bonus material for people who are still interested. It is fascinating materiel for discussion and debate.

This has been a pretty short review, which kind of reflects my main problem with this film: it doesn't have a lot to talk about. It tells some cool stories about ancient astronomers and gets into some interesting quantum physics but other than that there's not a whole lot of substance.

Overall: 2.5 out of 4 stars. Really cool and interesting but there's just not a lot of it. If you like Cosmos you'll enjoy this.

Reference scale:
Making stuff < Did God Create the Universe? < Cosmos

Movie Review: Captain America: The First Avenger

I'd say that Captain America: The First Avenger  is my favorite bad movie of all time. Pacific Rim comes close but The First Avenger takes the prize.

Steve Rogers (Chris Hemsworth) is a ninety pound asthmatic from Brooklyn who wants to go fight in the war. Prohibited by his physical condition, he is offered "a chance. And only a chance" by Army researcher Dr. Erskine (a great performance by Stanley Tucci). He passes training and becomes... Captain America!
He has super strength and everything, which he uses to fight Nazis, specifically their research team known as Hydra.

It features a witty screenplay by Christopher Marcus and Stephen McFeely, and has a few good laughs. The problem lies, in my opinion, in director Joe Johnson. His style of shooting is unoriginal and in my opinion, somewhat boring. He is also responsible for the legendarily bad ending, deciding to differ from the script and create an ending made little to no sense. Captain America is that comic book movie that we've seen a million times before. I really wish Joss Whedon had directed this. He was probably busy with one of his other projects, but I think that he could of done a much better job and made it a better film.

It does have good sides, however. The action sequences are cool even if they are a bit of the "he could never survive that" variety. It's fun to watch, despite the plot holes and the lack of anything new.

I do love comic book movies, and I'm probably to only reviewer out there who doesn't think that The Avengers was overrated. I suppose that's part of the reason that even though I hate everything that this movie is and the style of comic book movies that it represents, full of special effects and a pet peeve of mine (masks that look like faces that hide your true identity), I still enjoy watching it. I've seen it three times. And there are other movies that are a lot better that I've seen only once.

Overall: 2 out of 4 stars. If you enjoy comic book movies or all out action movies you'll enjoy this. It's a good time, just not a good movie.

Reference scale:
Iron man 2 < Captain America: The First Avenger < Thor

Movie Review: Rocky

"It's okay, I didn't want turkey anyway"
"But it's Thanksgiving!"
"Maybe to you it's Thanksgiving, but to me it's just a Thursday"

One of my favorite quotes from the film. This is a really good movie, one of my favorites of all time. It has a great plot, connectable characters and it's full of quotable dialogue.

Rocky Balboa (Sylvester Stallone) is a temperamental, down on his luck fighter and money collector with a fighting spirit and a heart of gold. This movie can really be broken into two halves. The first half of the movie focuses on Rocky's effort's to woo his best friend's sister, Adrian (Talia Shire). Halfway through, the movie changes tone and course. Through a stroke of luck, he gets the chance to fight reigning champion Apollo Creed (Carl Weathers) in a match for the title. Apollo knows that he can easily win, but unfortunately for Apollo, Rocky doesn't know that. It's an epic tale of triumph of the spirit that you must see.

The film is a bit of a character study, and it does it very nicely. Rocky goes from being a bum who isn't willing to work toward his goals to a determined and powerful character. During one of my favorite scenes in the movie, we observe his temperamental nature when his trainer, Mick (Burgess Meredith) comes over to convince him to get a manager. He quickly goes from welcoming to recessive and locking himself in the bathroom. Mick leaves and Rocky comes out, becoming angry and yelling through the door at Mick about how his house stinks and he never got into his prime. Mick is far away when Rocky has a final change of heart, running after Mick and apologizing, accepting his help.

Rocky is an extremely relatable character created by Sylvester Stallone who not only played him but wrote the screenplay for the film. Director John Avidsen uses a number of cinematic tricks that go well with the story. One thing I noticed was that in the beginning of the movie, each shot seems to linger for half a second too long, throwing the audience off-balance. He also masterfully uses focus. Not only are there several cool shots where he pulls focus, but during the fight scenes where Rocky is losing he puts the frame a touch, just a touch, out of focus. It's a disorienting effect that makes the audience further connect to the way that Rocky feels.

Overall: 4 out of 4 stars. One of my top movies of all time, an enjoyable and uplifting journey that proves movies don't need excess violence or sex to interest audiences.

Reference scale:
Remember the Titans < Rocky < Nothing. This, so far, is my favorite sports movie of all time.

Movie Review: Lord of the Rings

I saw this trilogy for the first time as I think all people should at some point in their lifetime, as a ten hour epic saga. My recommendation for viewing is to set aside a full day, make an unholy amount of popcorn and invite over your nerdiest friends. Put in the DVDs (the extended, three hour versions. None of that abridged crap) and watch them in sequence. It's hard to explain the scale and depth that this series has and you must see it to really understand. After you're done, get out your flashlights and stuffed animals and have a good ole slumber party.

For those of you who don't know the plot for one reason or another, the story is set in the land of Middle Earth, where men, elves, dwarves, goblins, orcs and hobbits all live. Several thousand years after a huge war that nearly caused the destruction of the land, the ring that used to belong to the leader of the forces of evil comes into the possession of a hobbit named Frodo (a masterful performance by Elijah Wood). A wizard named Gandalf (Ian McKellen) informs him of it's potential power and Frodo set out on a quest to destroy it in the volcano in which it was forged, the appropriately named Mount Doom. He takes along with him three hobbits, Sam (Sean Astin), Pippin (Billy Boyd) and Merry (Dominic Monaghan). They meet a cast of interesting characters and eventually split and each go into their own storyline without losing the interest of the audience.

Peter Jackson's adaptation of the classic J.R.R. Tolkien series is, in my opinion, one of the few cases where the quality of the movies actually surpasses that of the... never mind. I've decided that I don't want to be murdered by fan boys. But this really is a fantastic movie (I prefer to think of it as a ten hour long epic rather than three movies). It is a many layered film, with themes on corruption that in my opinion are very fitting today with the state of the government.

The cinematography is beautiful, from the giant mountains and amazing aerial  shots to the quick cuts and ominous tone of Gollum's arguments with himself. The movie connects you to the characters and takes you on a journey that will have you laughing on instant and on the edge of you seat biting your fingernails the next. A classic film for the ages.

Overall: 4 out of 4 stars. A must see, even if you don't like the sci-fi fantasy genre, even better if you are. I believe this is the last good movie, because we haven't had a significant contribution to cinema since this movie (one could argue for Brokeback Mountain but I'm still skeptical).

Reference scale:
Harry Potter < Lord of the Rings < Star Wars

Movie Review: Fast and Furious 6 (a.k.a. Furious 6)

Let me start off by saying this. If you are interested in film making, will ever be interested in film making or will ever think about how they make films, you should follow this advice: STOP AT THREE. Please. For my sake and for anyone who will ever watch a movie, please stop at three. I don't know if there has ever been a good movie in a series that came after three. I didn't HATE this movie, but honestly Justin Lin (who's directed the Fast and Furious movies) should of stopped at a trilogy and just kinda dusted his hands of it. Fast and Furious 7 is in production right now though and this movie made $780 million, so I guess... I'm the only one who cares.*

Okay, now that I'm down from my soap box let's actually talk about Fast and Furious 6. It's basically the same as all of the other Fast and Furious films (but now featuring amnesia). I don't know, I've always felt like amnesia was sort of a cop-out for the screenwriter. "I don't feel like coming up with a unique plot today" "That's okay, just give that chick amnesia and we'll make a couple million dollars". I'm obviously exaggerating a little bit, but with the exception of Memento I've never really liked the use of amnesia as a plot point.

Plot wise, it's not the worst it could of been. A terrorist is trying to build a bomb to wipe out the government's computers, and now the Fast and Furious team is going to stop him in exchange for pardons from the government. Also, we learn that Letty isn't dead, she just can't remember anything and so now she's working for the bad guys. After six movies it is hard to make good character development, so I'll give this movie credit for doing it decently. But to be honest, you know that no one who goes into this movie is looking for character development or plot. We want BOOM! EXPLOSION! EXCITEMENT! CAR!

The acting is decent for a street racing heist movie, only so-so in the grand scheme of things. Vin Diesel is Dom, which is by now a pretty iconic role for him. Like, it's no longer Vin Diesel is Dominic Toretto, it's Dominic Toretto is Vin Diesel. Kind of like a street racing Mark Hamill who isn't as good of an actor.

There are themes of racial equality that seem really forced and are only in the movie for a very small fraction of the run time. The main scene of this theme is almost painful in how overt it is, with a white car dealer is racist to Roman and disrespects him. Roman ends up buying all his cars and forcing the dealer to give Hobbes all of his clothes, which in my opinion is a bit dumb.

Overall: 1.5 of 4 stars
It's a good time purely for the street racing and all out action scenes. I doesn't have that great of any other elements, but if you just want to watch someone drive a Porsche off a bridge or watch a tank drive over cars on a freeway, this is a decent time.
Reference scale:
Transformers < Fast and Furious < 300


*Exception to this rule: Rocky. God I love those movies. You can expect a Rocky review in the near future.

Welcome to my Blog

Hi. My name is Matthew and I'm a independent screenwriter/director. I'm going to be writing on this blog about the movies that I watch this summer, giving you insight to the plot and how it is overall. If you'd rather read a professional movie reviewer, I wouldn't blame you. I'm probably only going to review older movies for now because of how expensive movie tickets are. I'll do my best to make all the entries as entertaining as possible for my readers. I'm attempting to post once a day, at least once every two days. I hope you enjoy!