Movie Review: "Cake" (2014)

Movie: "Cake"
Ticket Price: $9.75
Director: Daniel Barnz
Rating: R
Running Time: 1 hour, 42 minutes

Image Source

Claire Bennett (Jennifer Aniston) was a lawyer who, because of a car accident, is living with chronic pain and is addicted to prescription pain killers. When Nina (Anna Kendrick), a member of her support group, commits suicide, Claire becomes obsessed with her death. Claire gets to know Nina's widower, Roy (Sam Worthington) and hopes to learn more about the suicide. All the while, Claire is haunted by the memory of Nina and contemplates ending it all herself. 

Many have called the Academy not nominating Jennifer Aniston for Best Actress at the 2015 Oscars a snub, to which we say that we agree. For the first time ever, Jennifer Aniston manages to not annoy us in "Cake," the story of a woman named Claire who has many demons in her life. In an effort to keep the audience guessing, details about Claire's life are purposefully left out or swept under the rug until most impactful moments, but mostly, we had figured out what was going on within the first 10 minutes of the film. She is a very angry main character, and rightfully so given everything she has been through, but I must say, it made me miss a lot of the filmmaker's intended connection to have her be so blasé about everything. Her bitterness is a hard pill to swallow as an audience member, no pun intended, and no matter what the circumstances. Jennifer Aniston does play this role quite well and convincingly, and it is the best dramatic role from her to date. Then, we have Adriana Barraza as Silvana, Claire's sympathetic to a fault housekeeper who is underpaid and overworked, yet sticks around because it is quite obvious that she is Claire's only friend. Her performance is brilliant and we really wish she had been recognized more for her efforts in this film, though she was mostly overshadowed by Aniston. Together, they try to navigate through Claire's mess of a life without killing each other with passive-aggression. When Nina, a woman from her chronic pain support group, commits suicide, Claire is the only one who tells it like it is and how she really feels about the matter. Kicked out of her support group for being brutally honest, she blackmails Annette, the leader of said support group played by Felicity Huffman, for Nina's address. Then, Claire inexplicably turns up on Nina's husband's doorstep seeking what, we don't ever really know. Sympathy? To figure out why Nina committed suicide? To find a confidant in depression? To make a difference in someone else's life? All of the above? Nina's husband, bitter and jaded about her suicide and the situation she has left behind, is played by Sam Worthlesston, we mean Sam Worthington, and he and Claire bond over their shared sadness for their losses. We guess he does a fine job in this movie. William H. Macy, who plays a character from Claire's past, and Chris Messina, Claire's ex-husband, are both critically underused in this movie.

Claire and I have a lot in common when it comes to chronic pain, though hers was caused by an accident, not by birth. I can completely identify with not feeling good because of my rheumatoid arthritis and, as an unfortunate side effect of both medication and constant pain, unwillingly taking it out on the people who are closest to me because I don't feel good. The difference between my situation and Claire's is that hers seemed to need a loooooooooooot of pills to get her through the day. True, I do take quite a bit of medication, but it is not addict level status (though I'm sure some doctors might argue with this statement).

We are not disputing the fact that "Cake" as a whole is a very, very dramatic and Oscar baity film for Jennifer Aniston, especially considering that she produced it, too, but that doesn't mean it's bad by any stretch of the imagination. There are bits and pieces of the story I didn't care for, but I can't quite find the words to articulate why. Maybe it has to do with the aforementioned lack of connection, even though I can relate on a very intimate and personal level. I could also dispute some of the events in the movie as someone who takes a lot of medication myself, but that's neither here nor there. BigJ did like this movie a bit more than I did and he totally thinks there was snubbage all around. All in all, "Cake" was a good movie, though some might disagree. We have seen Jennifer Aniston in worse.

My Rating: 6/10
BigJ's Rating: 7/10
IMDB's Rating: 6.6/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 48%
Do we recommend this movie: Sure, why not?

Movie Review: "Strange Magic" (2015)

Movie: "Strange Magic"
Ticket Price: $12.50
Director: Gary Rydstrom
Rating: PG
Running Time: 1 hour, 39 minutes

Image Source

It's the wedding day of fairy princess Marianne (Evan Rachel Wood) and she is set to marry a fairy named Roland (Sam Palladio). Just before their wedding, Marianne catches Roland with another fairy and calls off their wedding. Roland, determined to be king, convinces an elf named Sunny (Elijah Kelley), who is in love with Marianne's sister Dawn (Meredith Anne Bull), to go into the Dark Forest with a primrose petal and convince the Sugar Plum Fairy (Kristin Chenoweth) to make them a love potion to use on the princesses. The Sugar Plum Fairy is currently being held captive by the Bog King (Alan Cumming), who rules the Dark Forest and hates love. Sunny's little quest unleashes the Bog King's wrath on the fairies as he takes Dawn as his prisoner. When Marianne goes to rescue her sister, she finds things aren't always what they seem. 

WHY???????????????  "Strange Magic" is one of my favorite songs and now it is nothing more than a trippin' balls movie for kids. Damn you, George Lucas!!

Let's start with the good things about this movie since that list is very short. The movie's animation is done very well and looks pretty good. In fact, it is much better than we thought it was going to be judging by the promotion we had seen for this film. Though we don't like the way the humanoid characters, like the fairies and elves are designed, all of the backgrounds, the other animals, the goblins, the forests and the Bog King himself look splendid. Our favorite of all of these creatures were the mushrooms, which look especially fantastic. This is where our positive review ends.

Having clean, crisp animation and a few cool looking characters is not enough to save a really magic-less film. Beyond what we mentioned above, the story, the dialogue and everything else is just bad. Really bad. When she finds her soon to be betrothed in the arms of another fairy, Marianne instantly "goes goth" and swears off love. And the other sister, Dawn? She's a flirt who only ever thinks about boys 24/7. Yeah, *that's* really helping the movement. Apart from this glaringly stereotypical plot line, the movie full of random old pop and rock songs which are completely out of place in an enchanted forest. It's almost as if George Lucas holed himself up in a weird deserted cabin for a month, listening to only his favorite mix tape and decided to make a movie out of all the songs. That, plus a few songs his kids like. Nothing feels cohesive about the music and the plot only serves as a way to lead from one song to the next. Very few of these songs are actually performed well apart from the ones including Alan Cumming, and even then, that is a short list in comparison to all the others that are howled and squawked at audiences for 1 hour and 40 minutes. We really tried to get into the tunes we have come to know and love, but when a fairy is flying around shrieking "Can't Help Falling in Love" by Elvis ad nauseam, it is seriously not a good time. And speaking of love, for a movie with a tag line like "Everybody deserves to be loved," which is a noble message for kids who feel like they are "different," there is a surprising lack of heart to it all. This message feels interwoven around the music as opposed to being front and center as the plot. There are really no connections between any of the characters, even the ones that are supposed to be smitten with one another. What little love there is feels forced and only there to, once again, plunge the final nail into the classic rock coffin by further the tarnishing of old time rock n' roll.

Elementary school aged children and younger will might like the look of this movie as well as how the music sounds, and by proxy, they might even get to know a bitchin' old school song or two because of this film, but will they connect to it at all, or will it just be "Three Little Birds" from that fairy movie, not the classic by reggae great Bob Marley? Will "Strange Magic" By ELO now always be synonymous with that one kids movie that really bombed? The bottom line is, from the get go, this movie is just strange and the magic remains to be seen. This isn't even a kids movie that adults will enjoy, even with what should be a fantastic soundtrack. It is as if Disney was afraid to be associated with this movie, even though it was under their umbrella. And no offense to the great Alan Cumming, but when he's one of the movie's biggest stars, you have to know you're targeting the wrong demographic.

Oh, and points to George Lucas for having literally no shame in making the Fairy King look exactly like his animated replica. Way to be subtle there, George! You are box office poison, and this is coming from two huge "Star Wars" fans.

My Rating: 3.5/10
BigJ's Rating: 4/10
IMDB's Rating: 5.4/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 17%
Do we recommend this movie: No.

Movie Review: "Mortdecai" (2015)

Movie: "Mortdecai"
Ticket Price: $12.50
Director: David Koepp
Rating: R
Running Time: 1 hour, 46 minutes

Image Source

Lord Charlie Mortdecai (Johnny Depp) is an art dealer on the verge of bankruptcy. When a Goya painting is stolen while being cleaned, MI-5 enlists the help of Mortdecai to find it due to his connections in the art world. MI-5 isn't the only one looking for the painting, though, as many unsavory characters are after the very valuable painting as well and they all think Mortdecai has it or at least knows where it is.  

RIP Johnny Depp's career.

As an actor, one might ask themselves after making several awful movies in a row spanning over the course of an entire decade, "when is enough enough?" or "should I quit while I am ahead?" or "have I become a joke?"

Because seriously, Johnny Depp, your acting career has become a joke. As box office numbers are rolling in from the weekend, it looks like this flibbity-flop only made around $4 million dollars. Yikes.

"Mortdecai" is another film in an unprecedentedly long list of mediocre or downright terrible January releases, with the exception of "Paddington." Movies released initially in December that "go wide" in January don't count, these are bonafide January releases, folks. The rough outline of this film seemed to be decent enough and seemed to have a lot of potential, but then filmmakers went and fed us this drivel. Watch Johnny Depp fumble and bumble and make weird grunting noises on his way to phoning it in for another paycheck by cheaply and offensively adding every single British stereotype known to man into his character. Charlie Mortdecai, an ignoramus of the highest level, who is a known thief and art dealer, somehow finds himself in the middle of a stolen portrait debacle. He resides in a mansion with his wif. If we ever got a look into Gwyneth Paltrow's day to day existence, the way her character Johanna Mortdecai acts is exactly how we'd expect her to be in real life: snobby, snotty, rude as hell, pretentious, willing to send her husband out of the room for a minor disagreement, and seductive in order to get what she wants all while gallivanting around in a fake British accent. We honestly believe Goop walks around her enormous mansion all by herself talking down to people while donning a phony British accent. Ewan McGregor, who is typically a favorite of ours, cannot even salvage this movie, though he's clearly the best part of this trainwreck, if best here means 1/10th of how good he normally is. Paul Bettany is fine, we guess, and with a better movie behind him, we may have been able to watch him shine as Jock, but here, he just looks like an idiot's henchman because he is. Jeff Goldblum, once again, is criminally underutilized in this movie. Olivia Munn is pointless. Her boyfriend is pointless. The plot is basic and the movie is so stale, it makes stale bread look like a fresh loaf just pulled from the oven.

"Mortdecai" is bad any way you slice it, but with Johnny Depp at the helm of this project, well, that's an extra cherry on the large mound of crap that is this film. It is not funny, not charming, not slick, not sly, not devious. It reminds us of someone trying so hard to attempt a British accent that they end up looking like a buffoon. Oh wait, it's because he is!!! Maybe this story would have been better as a dark comedy and not as a silly one, but we will never know. This winds up being an inexplicably R-rated "Pink Panther" knockoff with humor that appeals to a demographic that cannot see an R-rated movie. It's also hard to say it's a waste of a talented cast because we don't know how long it has been since Johnny Depp has been truly talented. His whole shtick in this film doesn't work whatsoever. When you leave a movie theater and your first reaction is, "that was ROUGH!!," you know you've just witnessed something resembling a turd in a punch bowl.

My Rating: 3/10
BigJ's Rating: 3/10
IMDB's Rating: 5.4/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 11%
Do we recommend this movie: AVOID LIKE THE PLAGUE!!!

Netflix Instant Queue Movie Review: "Still Alice" (2014)

Image Source

Movie: "Still Alice"
Director: Richard Glazer & Wash Westmoreland
Year: 2014
Rating: PG-13
Running Time: 1 hour, 41 minutes

When a university linguistics professor named Alice Howland (Julianne Moore) is diagnosed with early onset Alzheimer's disease, her whole life comes crashing down. She goes from someone at the top of her field to becoming confused and lost as more and more of her mind slips away. She and her family must learn to deal with her new disease and all that comes with it. 

Julianne Moore is considered the front-runner for Best Actress going into the Academy Awards this year for her role as Alice in this film. She has already won the Golden Globe and a slew of other awards, so her chances look good. This is also one of the most depressing roles of the year, which for actresses, more often than not means Oscar gold. When we say depressing, we mean it. There are no mincing words and there isn't much silver lining here. The entire movie consists of simply watching a once brilliant woman sink further and further into dementia. This film hits us especially close to home as BigJ's grandmother suffered from Alzheimer's disease later in life. Watching her decline was very, very hard, one of the hardest things we have had to deal with. A disease like this is not just hard on the person suffering from it, but also on those around them as well. After her husband passed away, BigJ's grandmother slowly slipped into her illness, and we don't know if she ever truly 100% knew that she had Alzheimer's disease. What started as simply forgetting appointments and the placement of objects slowly over the course of the next six years turned into forgetting people and how to care for herself. The difference with her illness and Alice's is that Alice's happened much quicker as she had familial early onset Alzheimer's, which is quite rare. This film does a good job of showing not just Alice's progression with the illness, but how her family is impacted by it, too. Some people may write her closest relatives off as selfish, but we do understand their troubles, as well as Alice's. Eventually, those affected by the illness even stop knowing you exist. Those suffering can't watch TV or movies, or even enjoy reading books because they can't understand fully what is going on. They often cannot remember how the story began or any of the characters by the time they are at the end.

The only word to describe how we felt after watching this movie is heavy. We felt a heavy sorrow in our hearts for remembering BigJ's grandma and how badly she deteriorated over the years. We felt heavy from the tears we cried together after watching this movie. A deep heaviness that won't go away anytime soon that reminded us not to take life for granted. We believe that, while Julianne Moore does do a fantastic job displaying all these qualities in the film, and she is definitely one of the top female performances this past year, we still favor the performance of Rosamund Pike in "Gone Girl" much better. Unfortunately, unlike Pike, who was in a widely successful movie, "Still Alice" will not be seen by nearly enough people as it only received a limited release. Overall, the film itself is just okay, bordering on being Lifetime-esque, but is certainly bolstered by an outstanding leading performance. Kristen Stewart can still go to hell, though.

My Rating: 7/10
BigJ's Rating: 7/10
IMDB's Rating: 7.5/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 85%
Do we recommend this movie: Sure, why not?

Movie Review: "The Boy Next Door" (2015)

Movie: "The Boy Next Door"
Ticket Price: $7.00
Director: Rob Cohen
Rating: R
Running Time: 1 hour, 31 minutes

Image Source

Claire Peterson (Jennifer Lopez) is a divorced teacher who is trying to get her and her son Kevin's (Ian Nelson) lives back on track after being hurt and cheated on by her now ex-husband Garrett (John Corbett). When a boy named Noah Sandborn (Ryan Guzman) moves in with his uncle next door after his parents are in a car accident, he quickly befriends Kevin and attempts to get closer to Claire. In an effort to bond with his son, Garrett takes Kevin on a camping trip for the weekend, leaving Claire home alone. She gets drunk after a bad first date experience and has a one-night stand with Noah. The next morning, she tries to distance herself from the situation, but Noah becomes obsessed with her and will stop at nothing to get Claire all to himself.

There's the January we know and love!!

Who would have thought that we'd see another 1/10 review so soon after "Dumb and Dumber To"? I thought it'd be at least another year before we'd have to give anything such a horrible rating. I mean, we expected "The Boy Next Door" to be bad. Eye-rollingly bad, in fact. I'm pretty sure everyone did. But this awful??? No one could have expected this level of badness.

Technically, and we mean technically as in actually and factually, this movie should be called "The Man Next Door." Within the first 10 minutes of the film, we find out in a line uttered by the lead "boy" character Noah, played appallingly by Ryan Guzman, that he is 19 going on 20, which means no real crime was actually committed by Jennifer Lopez's character Claire. BigJ and I both thought, "okay, maybe he is lying in order to get closer to Claire." NOPE #1. And, since we don't care that we're spoiling this point in an effort to save you from any single solitary thought that you might have about going to give the people involved in this movie your money, since no real crime had been committed, THERE'S ABSO-F*CKIN'-LUTELY NO POINT FOR THIS MOVIE TO CONTINUE PAST THE POINT WHERE THE TWO CHARACTERS HAVE SEX. Actually, we take it back, it's not a spoiler since it's implied in the trailer. A consenting adult who happens to be a teacher can have sex with whoever the hell she wants, even if that person happens to be 19, which is a full-fledged adult!!! And no, jerks of IMDb's message board section, this is not being a pedophile or a child rapist. In fact, we have a name for that in this society of ours, it's called BEING A COUGAR.

Now, regardless of how you feel about cougars, Claire did NOTHING wrong in this movie, apart from being absolutely, exceptionally stupid. Sure, she is a teacher, and as a teacher, one should probably make it a point not to sleep with their students, but it is further explained in the movie that, since his parents were in an accident, Noah lost time in school and had to finish senior year where Claire teaches. Believable enough. Or? Wait??? So, you mean to tell us that HE WASN'T EVEN HER STUDENT WHEN THEY HAD SEX???? So there was LITERALLY NO PROBLEM AT ALL??????!!!!!!! What about her husband?!? OH WAIT, Claire is also going through a divorce from her unfaithful husband Garrett, played uselessly by John Corbett, so really, the only thing she has to lose is the respect of her son. Why the hell was this movie even made if there is no point to the conflict in the first place?!?!??! After realizing that she's made a huge mistake (points if you get the reference), Claire tells Noah she cannot continue the "relationship" and that she was vulnerable even though she cleeeeearly peeped at his butt from the window on more than one occasion. Pissed, Noah sends an email from Claire's account to the principal of her school saying that she okay'ed him to be in her class. Uhhhh, no?? Not only did she have to say she didn't write the email IN THE FIRST PLACE, but she could have EASILY said, "Look, I had a relationship with this person, WHO IS AN ADULT, he cannot be in my class because it's a conflict of interest." End of the movie, part 2.

What is not in any way, shape, or form believable is how anyone in this film didn't even think about calling the cops. We kid you not, there were at least 6 times during the course of this rather short movie where we were thinking, "Okay, now someone is going to call the cops." NOPE #2. No one calls the cops. Ever. Not even after adult Noah bashes in some under-aged bully's skull into a locker. Not even after he secretly photographed and videotaped his and Claire's liaison. Not even after showing Claire's dipshit, gullible son Kevin (Ian Nelson) how to shoot a firearm and attempted to turn him against both his mom and his dad. Not even after hearing her best friend Vicky's (played awfully by the annoying in this movie Kristin Chenoweth) anguished cries on the phone knowing full well that Noah was out there looking for both of them. NEVER. NOT ONCE.

All in all, quash any tiny fragment you might have in your mind about seeing this movie. Please. The dialogue is atrocious, the editing is hogwash, the scenario doesn't even need to happen the way it did, and the acting...oh, the acting. Like we mentioned, DO NOT give these people your hard earned money. Not only do they not deserve it, but they don't deserve to work again. Jennifer Lopez, since we know you're reading, PLEASE do yourself and the public at large a great favor and DO. NOT. ACT. ANYMORE. You are beautiful, this is quite true, but we have never seen so many blatant pan-down shots of a clothed ass in a movie. If you want to go full nude, JUST DO IT, GIRL! No one is stopping you and no one will think less of you. And we don't buy the whole "Oh, these super sexy f-me pump shoes are not my style," when it's clear that you wore high heels and wedges the entire freakin' movie!! And Ryan Guzman, go back to mixed martial arts. Please. You DO NOT have a future in acting. You might as well go back to modeling since that is basically what you have accomplished in this movie, only with modeling, we don't have to hear you open your annoying, yappy mouth. The words "hot mess," "train wreck" and "piece of trash" are not harsh enough to describe how atrociously horrendous "The Boy Next Door" truly is. Knowing that this 1/8th-assed excuse for a knock-off of "Fatal Attraction" exists makes us angry about existing in the same world as it does. The best thing about this movie was that it ended.

My Rating: 1/10
BigJ's Rating: 1/10
IMDB's Rating: 4.4/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 13%
Do we recommend this movie: AVOID LIKE THE PLAGUE!!!

Movie Review: "Spare Parts" (2015)

Image Source

Movie: "Spare Parts"
Director: Sean McNamara
Rating: PG-13
Running Time: 1 hour, 53 minutes

Fredi Cameron is an out of work engineer who takes a job as a substitute teacher at a high school in Arizona. Oscar Vasquez is a student who only ever wanted to be in the military but couldn't because he is undocumented. After being denied enlistment, Oscar learns of a national robotics competition and wants to enter. He convinces Mr. Cameron, who reluctantly runs the robotics club, to let them try and enter the competition, provided Oscar can find a few other students to join. Oscar finds a computer geek named Cristian to help design, Mr. Cameron convinces the mechanically inclined Lorenzo to join, and to help with the heavy lifting Cristian convinces football player Luis to come aboard. Together with little experience and almost no money these kids must design and construct a robot to put in competition against the best technical universities in the country like MIT, Columbia, and Virginia Tech.

For a movie that received little to no promotion in our area, we were surprised to see "Spare Parts" pop up in one of our local theaters last week. With nothing else to see, we decided to take a chance on it. Though often cliche and rather formulaic, this movie manages to hit the right notes when necessary to drive an emotional response from the audience. It does help that this is based on a true-life underdog story that is incredibly inspirational and fun all on its own. Unlike a movie from last year called "When the Game Stands Tall," which is also meant to be an inspirational film based on a true story that didn't captivate us in the slightest, the group of kids in "Spare Parts" are neither rich, private school educated, or legal citizens of this country. Already, the odds are stacked against them and they have very few people in their corner to help them achieve their goals. Oscar's military dreams are quickly dashed when it turns out he needs a birth certificate to enlist. So, when he shifts his thinking and gets the idea to enter a national robotics competition with a budget of only about $800, it seems like an impossible task. Armed with just their brains and a little bit of faith from an unlikely mentor in transient teacher Fredi Cameron, played well by George Lopez, as well as a couple of other faculty members, Oscar, Critsian, Lorenzo and Luis defy all odds and make a really fantastic robotics machine, beating out some of the top schools in the nation like M.I.T., Cornell, Virginia Tech and others. Not only is the story intriguing, but it is full of built-in drama, making it worth the emotional investment, as well as the time investment. What this movie also accomplishes is bringing about a relevant political position. Since the main four boys are all undocumented citizens, the threat of deportation is always looming in the background, despite the fact that each of the boys grew up in America and this is the only country they have ever known. Though they know they are destined for more and can offer a lot to the United States, especially Oscar, who is willing to serve in the armed forces for a country that isn't even his own, I.C.E. (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) doesn't see it that way and wants to ship them back to Mexico. The real-life outcome is also worth the journey through all of the usual inspirational film fodder, but we understand if you'd rather save the money and read about it online. All in all, this is a pretty well-acted movie, though it does teeter on formulaic and dramatic every now and then.

My Rating: 7.5/10
BigJ's Rating: 7.5/10
IMDB's Rating: 7.5/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 52%
Do we recommend this movie: Sure, why not?

Movie Review: "Blackhat" (2015)

Movie: "Blackhat"
Ticket Price: $7.00
Director: Michael Mann
Rating: R
Running Time: 2 hours, 13 minutes

Image Source

A hacker attacks a nuclear power plant in China, shutting off its pumps which causes an explosion. Next, he hits the Chicago commodities market and drives up the price of soy and, in effect, steals millions of dollars. The Hong Kong government sends Chen Dawai (Leehom Wang) to work with the U.S. Department of Justice to uncover this cyber terrorist. The hacker is using a Remote Access Tool, or R.A.T., implant his malware into these systems. Chen Dawai suggests they contact the programmer who wrote the R.A.T. to help find the hacker. That programmer is Chen Dawai's old MIT roommate and convicted felon Nick Hathaway (Chris Hemsworth). Nick agrees to find their hacker in exchange for a commuted sentence, provided that he's successful.  

My, how the mighty have fallen.

Michael Mann used to be a respected director that made excellent films like "Heat," "The Last of the Mohicans" and "Collateral." Apparently, long gone are the days where he could make a successful film because "Blackhat" opened at number 11 this past weekend at the domestic box offices. #11! That's pitiful, but for a good reason. "Blackhat" also sucks hardcore and for many reasons. First, it is way too long. Second, not only is it way too long, but it is also slow as hell. I mean, we've watched paint dry faster than this movie. Not only does it drag through its run time at a snail's pace, but it tries to compensate over this horribly slow speed by throwing technological jargon at its audiences over and over again. By overusing this computer science 101 jargon, the dialogue actually sounds more stupid than smart. Third, since Chris Hemsworth is Thor and everybody loves Thor, logically, by proxy, everyone loves Chris Hemsworth. He is bloody awful in this movie and we know he can do more. He's also worth more. He can't keep his accent worth a damn. It's also obvious that he has a contractual obligation, much like his brother Lesser Hemsworth, to take off his shirt at least twice in every single movie. I never thought I'd say this, folks, but there were too. many. close-up. shots. of. Chris. Hemsworth. in. this. movie. It was distracting, and not because he is pretty, but because Michael Mann is obviously focusing on his sunglasses and his hair from the back and his side-glance and his pecs and mouth and eyes for dramatic emphasis, not for fluidity or purpose. Fourth, the audio and sound mixing in this film, as well as the dubbing over people's voices, is blatantly the worst we have ever seen, at least in the last decade. This is coupled with the fact that, even when the actor's faces are slightly turned off-screen, it's clear that they are not moving their mouths and jaw even though their voices are playing through the theater's stupid speakers. We can tell when the actors are not moving their mouths, guys and gals! It's not rocket science! In one scene about 10 minutes into the movie, Chris Hemsworth's voice goes from really really quite to extremely loud all in the course of about .4323846 seconds. Fifth, for the second time in January, we have an action movie that feels like it will accomplish something other than making audience-goers sick by using a handy-cam or Go-Pro in parts of the movie with intense movement. There's a scene in the middle of the film where Hemsworth, et al. run down a corridor and through a bunch of alleyways in an attempt to catch a bad guy and it seriously made me nauseous. This scene also goes on entirely too long, and if we had to guess, we'd say it lasted over 4 minutes in total. Reign it in! Sixth, Hemsworth isn't the only one off his game here. The typically fierce Viola Davis isn't even enough to make this movie worthwhile. Seventh, from the minute we see Chen Lein (Wei Tang) on screen, we know that filmmakers are going to force a love story between her and Hemsworth on us. Their "love" is not believable and it's not relevant, it's just completely shoe-horned into the film in an effort to make Hemsworth fulfill said contractual obligation. Eighth, the trailer for this movie is really misleading. We can't expand upon this without giving away what little semblance of a plot this movie tries to have at the end, so we'll just quit while we're ahead. Ninth, filmmakers attempt to evoke sympathy from a completely unnecessary 9/11 reference towards the end of the movie for no damn reason. This is not a huge plot point and isn't even explored again after the scene where the line is first uttered, so why include it in the first place? Using 9/11 to get a rise out of audience members is just lame at this point.

Bottom line, avoid this muddled piece of crap at all costs. It's simply a disaster and feels sloppy from the get go. Just because you like Chris Hemsworth and/or Michael Mann does not mean every single film that they do is going to be good. And just because the topic might be timely and pertinent to our current state of affairs doesn't mean it's going to accomplish anything it sets out to do. This is absolutely the case with "Blackhat." This is one of those times where we're glad we didn't pay full price to see this film and may have even walked out of in the middle of the movie otherwise. At least "Taken 3" made us laugh ironically, this almost put us to sleep.

My Rating: 3/10
BigJ's Rating: 3/10
IMDB's Rating: 5.6/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 31%
Do we recommend this movie: AVOID LIKE THE PLAGUE!!!

Movie Review: "Paddington" (2015)

Movie: "Paddington"
Director: Paul King
Rating: PG
Running Time: 1 hour, 35 minutes

Image Source

While exploring darkest Peru, English explorer Montgomery Clyde (Tim Downie) discovers a new species of bear. He spends time studying them, names them Lucy (Imelda Staunton) and Pastuzo (Michael Gambon), and even teaches the bears a bit of English. He also introduces them to orange marmalade. He tells them all about his hometown of London and tells them they are always welcome there. Now, many years later, those bears have a nephew currently named gerrrroooorrr, but soon to be called Paddington (Ben Whishaw). Paddington lives with them, speaks English and loves marmalade, too. After their home is destroyed in an Earthquake, which also causes the death of Pastuzo, Lucy sends Paddington to England to find a new home. Once arriving in London, the little bear stands at Paddington station with a note around his neck simply reading, "Please look after this bear, Thank You." Most ignore him, except for Mary Brown (Sally Hawkins), who offers to help him, much to the chagrin of her husband Henry (Hugh Bonneville). She names him Paddington for obvious reasons. They agree to take him in and give him a temporary home until they can find him a permanent one. What they nor Paddington know is a taxidermist named Millicent (Nicole Kidman) has been searching for a specimen like Paddington to stuff and put in the museum where she works. She will do everything she can to make him an exhibit, named Ursa Marmalada.  

Here's another (back-to-back) example of the trailer dichotomy we were talking about in our review of "The Wedding Ringer." In the case of "Paddington," in an effort to draw in kids, all of the silliest parts of the movie were showcased in its trailer. Well, folks, movies are not the sum of their trailers because "Paddington" is seriously one of the cutest kids movies we have ever seen! BigJ and I had huge grins on our faces the entire movie to the point where our cheeks hurt after all was said and done.

The movie gets its super sad part out of the way early on. I guess the depressing film opener is not only for Disney. From there, we get to watch Paddington try to find his place in London, which is not what he thought it would be. People are rude, they have no manners, and they don't want to be associated with the likes of a bear...that is, until the Brown family takes an interest. We as audience members know all too well that housing bears can make for some sticky and tricky situations. It's clear that the family is in strife, and Paddington might be the one to solidify them as a unit once again. Each of the Browns have their own quirks. These quirks are put on display in a series of wonderful little vignettes from the point of view that can only be described as a smaller dollhouse version of their home. The door opens to find each room of the Brown's house occupied by one of its family members. When panned back, the scene of this house is both colorful and zany. Mr. Brown, played masterfully by the fantastic Hugh Bonneville, is a risk analyst and does not let his kids do anything that seems the slightest bit dangerous. Mary Brown, played by the delightful and eccentric Sally Hawkins, is the only one who sees that Paddington is truly more than just a lost bear. We watch her convince the rest of the family that he's not so bad, while simultaneously trying to be there for her kids, even though she is often intruding. Judy Brown, played by Madeleine Harris, is a perpetually embarrassed teenager who thinks her parents are the least cool people in the world. Jonathan, youngest member of the Brown clan, played by Samuel Joslin, likes to build things and take risks, which is his dad's worst nightmare. Then, there is Mrs. Bird, played by Julie Walters, who likes everything in tip top shape and in its place. She was such a welcome addition to the film. These vignettes come together in a masterful interlude, while simultaneously keeping the story going. We absolutely love the way the director of the movie, Paul King, made these scenes come to life. When panned in, we find out that each of the Brown's has a reason for why they are the way they are. That's the thing about "Paddington," there were tons of "if you blink, you might miss it" details that we adored. Somehow, King not only made them fit into the story, but did so seamlessly and gently. There was no frenetic pacing, no rushing, no awkward moments where one might feel like that had to look at their watch to see when the movie would be over. This movie was actually sort of perfect to me.

Not only is the story adorable, but it looks like each and every person involved with this movie took a painstaking amount of time and pride and diligence to get the film just right to maintain the spirit and the essence of the beloved Paddington. It is not only extremely well acted by all of its participants, but it is a fun film to boot. Even Nicole Kidman, resident "nose turned up" actress looked like she was having a ball as the film's villain Millicent, who wanted to catch Paddington to stuff for her father's museum exhibit. Dark, but not overwhelmingly so in comparison to other kids movies, Kidman is sort of a freak, but she makes a wickedly satisfying bad-gal. It honestly looks like this movie was a riot to make! The computer animated graphics mixed in with live action was also brilliant. In fact, it's one of the best CGI and live action hybrid films we have seen. Usually, there are a lot of visible problems and critiques to be made, but all of the CGI in this film was rather flawless.

Kids will love this flick, but the adults who grew up with the series will love it on their own, too. We can remember reading Paddington as kids, so to see him come alive on the big screen is nothing short of fantastic. The vibrancy of its colors, the special and intricate details of the setting and plot, as well as the humor and smiles it brings makes this movie definitely worth seeing in theaters. Please give this film a chance. It is so much better than half of the drivel that is put out there and masqueraded as a "family friendly" kids movie. This cuddly little bear is one you will want to squeeze forever and ever, and this movie is one that we envision watching for years to come.

My Rating: 9/10
BigJ's Rating: 8.5/10
IMDB's Rating: 7.6/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 98%
Do we recommend this movie: ABSOLUTELY YES!!!

Movie Review: "The Wedding Ringer" (2015)

Image Source

Movie: "The Wedding Ringer"
Director: Jeremy Garelick
Rating: R
Running Time: 1 hour, 41 minutes

Doug Harris (Josh Gad) is about to tie the knot with his fiancé Gretchen (Kaley Cuoco-Sweeting), a woman he's always seen as way out of his league. Gretchen expects him to have a best man and seven groomsmen for their wedding. The only problem is that Doug doesn't have any friends. With no friends to fill those slots, Doug hires Jimmy Callahan (Kevin Hart), the owner and operator of The Best Man, Inc., to be his best man. Jimmy will also find Doug the seven groomsmen he needs, but for a price. As part of the package Doug bought, Jimmy acts as his fake best friend leading up to the wedding, but also shows Doug the time of his life. 

Trailers do both a service and a disservice to the movie-going public that can go either way. First, the trailer can lay out each and every single thing that is going to happen in a movie which is often the case with most trailers. Or, the trailer can be so misleading that it feels like you're watching another movie entirely. Though most of what is going to happen in "The Wedding Ringer" is pretty much disclosed in the trailer, our reaction to the movie is definitely not how we thought it would go down! The trailer had us groaning so ridiculously hard that we weren't even sure if we wanted to see this film. In fact, we may have projected our initial hatred of this movie onto other people. #WeAreOnlyHuman

Well, we're willing to admit when we're wrong, and we were pleasantly surprised to find that this was a Kevin Hart movie that actually made us laugh, and quite a bit at that! Usually, Hart is a one-trick pony for us with his signature brand of obnoxious and loud humor, and though this is mostly the case here, for some reason, it worked when he was paired up with Josh Gad. The two of them worked really well together on screen, to our surprise! A lot of the "bigger" jokes that filmmakers thought were going to be slam-dunks were not so for us. When we say "bigger," we mean the ones that were supposed to be surefire hits, you know, the ones about race, sexist diatribes, weight and rape. Seriously, Hollywood, can we stop with the rape jokes? THEY AREN'T FUNNY. EVER. There is also one scene during Doug's bachelor party that involves and dog and peanut butter, and well, we'll let you use your imagination for the rest. This went waaaaay over the line. The humor that worked so well in this movie was the subtle dialogue and the quippy afterthoughts by both Gad and Hart, as well as Gad's band of misfit groomsmen. What a group of weirdos. Sure, the rest of these subtle exchanges are raunchy and sometimes grotesque and bizarre, but hey, it's an R-rated comedy! And we're speaking to the people who sat behind us at our movie showing who brought her middle-school aged daughters to this movie. What were you thinking?!

There is a bit of touching Hart, errr, heart in this movie, but it's nothing you can't see coming a mile away. In fact, it's very obvious from the very first opening interaction between Josh Gad's Doug and his sweetheart Gretchen, played by Kaley "I'm not a feminist" Cuoco-Sweeting, that she is just not that into him and it will probably become painfully so later on in the film. It's crystal clear, in fact, and you're basically spending the next hour waiting for the final bombshell and the other shoe to drop. Until then, the ride along the way is humorous, even with the seemingly mismatched Gad and Hart taking the center stage. While most people will think this is mediocrity at its best, for us, we can now say there's a Kevin Hart movie in existence that we sort of enjoyed, but it's nothing we will ever need to see again, nor will it be a classic comedy occupying a coveted spot on our shelves anytime soon.

My Rating: 6/10
BigJ's Rating: 6/10
IMDB's Rating: 6.8/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 33%
Do we recommend this movie: Sure, why not?

Movie Review: "Falling Down" (1993)

Image Source

Movie: "Falling Down"
Director: Joel Schumacher
Year: 1993
Rating: R
Running Time: 1 hour, 53 minutes

William Foster (Michael Douglas) is just having one of those days. He is an out of work and divorced defense contractor who, one day while stuck in traffic in the sweltering heat with no air conditioning and a window that won’t roll down, snaps a little and decides to abandon his car to try to “go home” to see his daughter for her birthday. Of course, his daughter lives with his ex-wife Elizabeth (Barbara Hershey) who has a restraining-order against William, though he has never done anything violent to her or their daughter. He now must walk across Los Angeles and, along the way, hecreates some havoc in his path. He busts up a convenience store that won’t give him change and overcharges for products, beats up some gang members who try and rob him, and shoots up a fast food restaurant that won’t serve him breakfast at 10:35 because they stopped serving breakfast at 10:30. To him he is just your average American standing up for his rights as a consumer and doesn’t see anything he’s doing is wrong. This mayhem that Foster has done draws the attention of Detective Pendergast (Robert Duvall) who despite being one day from retirement takes it upon himself to try to find and stop Foster before he gets “home” to his ex-wife and daughter. 

"Falling Down" is truly a great movie. Have you ever had a bad day? William Foster has had too many bad days and is finally fed up with life. We get to live vicariously through William as he unleashes his frustrations with the hassles of everyday life in ways we could only ever dream about and not that we ever really could or would. This movie is sort of the ultimate revenge fantasy when you think about it, only this time, it's against everyday life. Outside of a run-in with some local gang members and a crazy nazi, William faces many first world problems that most of us experience day in and day out, like being stuck in traffic in the sweltering heat with no air conditioning, like being overcharged for a can of soda at a convenience store, like being 5 minutes too late to get breakfast at your favorite local fast food place, or like witnessing street construction being done during rush hour (a personal favorite of ours to hate). Sure, everything William does is highly illegal, but this movie strangely makes us root for him because his destruction and all of the things he does are physical manifestations of our emotional frustrations. He doesn't go around killing innocent people willy nilly, and those he does harm are "bad" people, like the aforementioned gang members and nazis, which makes him an intriguing antihero of sorts. Michael Douglas portrays William beautifully and crazily, and it's not like we all of a sudden see him freak out because it's apparent in his demeanor and attitude that these frustrations have been inside of him for a long, long time. There is some definite concern right from the beginning of the film that he could eventually cross the line, and he does so fast. Enter Detective Prendergast, played excellently by Robert Duvall, who is the true hero of the film who must work to stop our antihero. We know Prendergast is in the right when he wants to stop William, but we as audience members are conflicted about whether or not we want him to succeed in taking William down.

This movie deals with some deep moral conflicts and societal issues while remaining fun and entertaining. It also has a clear-cut message that it is able to deliver without feeling preachy. This movie is an indictment of the working public and the economy of the United States as a whole. William is out of work after being let go from his job and was told he is no longer economically viable since he is older and more expensive to pay than the person who was to be hired in place of him, a younger and cheaper worker. It's about how companies treat their workers, laying people off to get cheaper and cheaper labor, then turning around and charging more for their products and not treating their customers like they matter. When you phrase it like this, we agree with William. This movie was made in 1993 and this problem still exists in America! If that's not enough to make you go crazy, too, well, we just don't know what will. Overall, this is a well balanced and well acted movie that we can and do watch time and time again when we need an antihero to root for.

My Rating: 9/10
BigJ's Rating: 9/10
IMDB's Rating: 7.6/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 73%
Do we recommend this movie: ABSOLUTELY YES!!!
~~~~~~~~~~
One year ago, we were watching:

Movie Review: "American Sniper" (2014)

Image Source

Movie: "American Sniper"
Director: Clint Eastwood
Rating: R
Running Time: 2 hours, 14 minutes

Chris Kyle (Bradley Cooper) is a bull rider and thinks he is a cowboy, but he also knows deep down that he is meant for more in this life. Shortly after signing up for the military, he meets Taya (Sienna Miller) at a bar. The two become close and eventually get married shortly after 9/11. During their wedding, Chris gets the call that he is to be shipped to Iraq to fight in the war. While there, he eventually becomes known as "The Legend" since he is such a good sniper. Back in Texas, Taya must adjust to life with 2 children, always knowing that her husband could be killed at any second on the battlefield. Chris must balance his military life with his home life, but has a hard time adjusting to being present while he is home. In this film based on true events, in total, Chris Kyle served four tours in Iraq and holds the record for the deadliest sniper in U.S. history with 150 confirmed kills.

Movie Review: "Taken 3" (2015)

Image Source

Movie: "Taken 3"
Director: Olivier Megaton
Rating: PG-13
Running Time: 1 hour, 49 minutes

Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson) is back, and now on much better terms with his ex-wife Lenore (Famke Janssen), who has been having marital problems with her current husband Stuart (Dougray Scott). When Lenore is murdered in Bryan's apartment police think he is the prime suspect. Now, wanted for murder, Bryan must prove his innocence and solve his wife's murder, all while evading police custody. 

It was the bagels!

We'll be the first to admit that the original "Taken" surprised us a lot because it was a solid action flick with an unexpected and kick ass new-found protagonist in Liam Neeson. Then, they came out with "Taken 2," which pushed the envelope in zero ways since it was essentially the same story, but in a different location. Some parts of #2 were decent enough, though BigJ liked it a bit more than I did. Now, Hollywood has come out with "Taken 3," which is a complete and total disaster that makes it clear that its filmmakers and director weren't even trying to mask that they were only in it for the money.

There is a point in an action star's life where they really start to look their age. Sylvester Stallone hit that mark a long time ago but managed to get trapped in the same situation now, in his 60's, though his franchise is dying, too. It is now the same story for Liam Neeson, who has also hit the point in his life where he just needs to dial it back a bit. In this film, the 62-year old Neeson actually looks like he is tremendous amounts of physical pain when he is simply running down the street. There's a scene where Forest Whitaker is running down a college campus hallway, and still, it's the same story, painful jaunting from side to side, stiff arms and all. When they are chasing people, tearing up the bad guys and evading impossible situations, knowing how much pain they look like they are in makes it that much harder to believe they can still kick ass. But, we digress.

"Taken 3" is nothing but a sack of cliches sold as an "action" movie. Every scene is full of contrived moments with a wide-ranging set of reactions from "what the hell?" in an ironic way to "what the fuck?" in a laugh out loud bad way. Forest Whitaker walks around the movie with a goddamn chess piece and twirls it whenever possible!! He also has rubber bands that he plays with when he can't find his friggin' chess piece! When Neeson walked away from his second, count 'em, his second explosion without so much as an explanation as to how he escaped from a burning fucking car wreck, you've got to just shake your head. And not only that, but he was so clean that it looked like he had time to stop at the spa for a haircut and pedicure, as well as the dry cleaner for a fresh pressed suit on his way to his next scene! And we have not once, NOT ONCE, ever seen a cop car with no barrier between the front and back seat. And what's with Famke Janssen's husband this time around? He is played by a completely different and much more sinister looking actor! OBVIOUSLY, the dude is hiding a buttload of secrets in his grizzled face!

To say everyone involved in this project was phoning it in is giving them at least a little bit of credit, which they don't deserve. Add these cliches and horrible scenes to an utterly useless Maggie Grace and Famke Janssen, an aging Liam Neeson and Forest Whitaker, with an unnecessarily large dose of Olivier Megaton's frenetic editing style that makes you want to puke (thanks for the comparison, Jeff!) and you have all of the makings of a dreadful final act to what didn't need to be a trilogy in the first place. Shame on you, Liam Neeson!

My Rating: 3/10
BigJ's Rating: 3/10
IMDB's Rating: 6.5/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 10%
Do we recommend this movie: AVOID LIKE THE PLAGUE!!!

Movie Review: "Manhattan" (1979)

Image Source

Movie: "Manhattan"
Director: Woody Allen
Year: 1979
Rating: R
Running Time: 1 hour, 36 minutes

Isaac (Woody Allen) is a neurotic 42-year old writer living in New York and is struggling to sort out his love life. He is dating a 17-year old girl named Tracy (Mariel Hemingway), but wants to give her up when he starts to fall for his best friend's mistress, Mary (Diane Keaton).

Oh, Woody Allen. Will you ever not be so transparent, even when speaking about your movies from the past?

The entire beginning premise of this film is creepy to say the least. The main character, who is, of course, played by Allen himself, is a 42-year old divorcee who has a casual sexual relationship with a 17-year old girl. Art imitating life or vice versa? When and if you can get over this fact long enough to stomach their "relationship" over the course of the rest of the movie, he doesn't exactly treat her well, either. He never lets her stay over at his house for the night and constantly reminds her that their entire thing together is just a fling. It plays out on screen as the twisted mid-life crisis fantasy of a middle aged man clinging to his youth by dating a younger woman with no strings attached. He is ready to push her away quickly enough when he finds the first real woman to come along and challenge him intellectually and to stand up to his bullshit. This woman has interests closer to his, but she just so happens to be the former mistress of his best friend. As a whole, the film is basically a look at four clusterfucked relationships of two men in Manhattan. The rest of the movie is filled up with the typical Woody Allen neuroses in the form of odd hand gestures that never seem to stop, "artistic" wit and psuedo-intellectual ramblings for long stretches of time, and bickering dialogue and the occasional one-line zinger from Allen. Diane Keaton plays the same character she has played for centuries, and that is the uber-liberal, outspoken oddball type. Though Mariel Hemingway got an Oscar nomination for her role as Tracy, we can't say it was an exceptional part, not that her acting was bad, it just didn't stand out in anyway.

Maybe we lack the "New York experience," but either way, nothing in this movie stands out as being anything more than the same crap Allen has shoveled at the masses for decades, only this time, much more ironic, considering it's supposed to be a romance that almost identically mirrors his own life. Maybe when this film came out 35 years ago, it was more pertinent. Maybe now, the tellings of history have clouded our judgment, but we think not. Regardless of whether you are on the anti-Woody Allen train or not, unfortunately, "Manhattan" has not stood up to the test of time, at least not to us.

My Rating: 4/10
BigJ's Rating: 4/10
IMDB's Rating: 8.0/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 98%
Do we recommend this movie: No.

Lolo's Lists: Top 10 BIGGEST DISAPPOINTMENTS of 2014!

While there were a ton of great and surprising movies in 2014, there were an equal number of disappointing ones, too. These are films that we kept an open mind about and even some that we were really excited to see, or were critically acclaimed, or were sequels to movies we originally loved, but ultimately left us feeling underwhelmed, crestfallen and disenchanted with the movie-going experience. Dramatic much? You be the judge. Do you agree or disagree with out list? Let us know!
~~~~~~~~~~

10) "Foxcatcher" - Though the acting in this movie is all around outstanding, "Foxcatcher" itself is slow moving and boring, and without these performances, it wouldn't have been as successful as it was. The time span of this film gets compressed down into a two year time period when, in reality, the events taking place unfolded over at least a decade. This change makes John du Pont simply look like a vengeful ex-friend as opposed to what really happened where he ultimately had a slow descent into madness and psychosis, which is all but eliminated.

9) "Rosewater" - While we love Jon Stewart and he truly did try his best with this directorial debut, "Rosewater" is definitely up there on the disappointment scale for us. It is obvious that Stewart felt somewhat responsible for what happened to Maziar Bahari in real life and this was most certainly a passion project for him. Though it is informative, it's at a huge disadvantage because of its slow moving pace, its lack of emotional connection and its mediocre acting.

8) "Men, Women & Children" - Heralded in its trailers as a film that will expose how little you know about the people you know, "Men, Women & Children" completely drops the ball. Jason Reitman, the film's director and self-ego inflater extraordinaire, attempts to tackle the big issue of the prevalence of technology in our modern society, which is noble, but ultimately, he fails on almost every level. All of the film's problems existed before the internet was around, so he's really not shattering anyone's world. This movie is basic as hell and should really be called "White Men, Women & Children with First World Problems."

7) "The Giver" - Even an all-star cast featuring King Jeff Bridges and Queen Meryl Streep couldn't save "The Giver" from focusing too much on the romantic aspect of the story and doing this "trivializes the true power of the emotions we are supposed to feel by reducing it to no more than a teenage crush." While the book was written decades ago, it seems too little, too late for the movie adaptation. There's not enough focus on the meat and potatoes of their Utopian society as the beginning of the story is glossed over in a short introduction of text and nothing more than that. To get a sense of why this society gave up its emotions and individuality, we feel like we needed more than just words on a screen. No one reacts right and no one acts right. Everything about this movie felt off.

6) "Boyhood" - We're going to take a lot of heat for this, but "Boyhood" is basically just a story about a boy growing up as we simultaneously watch its lead actor grow up on screen in real life. Though I identified with the story more than BigJ since it was made during the years when I was growing up, he felt like Mason's (played by Ellar Coltrane) "life was rather average and mundane apart from a few poor choices on behalf of his mother." Aided by the fact that it doesn't drag through its run-time, "Boyhood," to us, is nothing more than gimmicky film making that will probably take home Oscar gold because of it.

5) "Annabelle" - After absolutely loving "The Conjuring," we were so excited for "Annabelle," but we should have trusted our gut when we thought of how rushed this prequel seemed to be made in order for it to get released quickly after the original. Full of typical horror movie jump scares, awful acting and stupid dialogue, it's simply a mixed bag "and a lot of wasted potential for that fugly, demonic doll."

4) "Dumb and Dumber To" - In the grand scheme of waiting for sequels, one would logically assume that waiting 20+ years for one is greater than waiting almost 10 years for one, and you'd be right, but this is our list, so deal with it! "Dumb and Dumber To" is just that: dumb and dumber. Seriously, we feel like our IQ dropped just a little bit after watching this "film," if you can call it that. It's plot and jokes are recycled and Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels are awful and disappointing to say the least. It has definitely earned a place in the "train-wreck hall of fame," and it doesn't help that we didn't even laugh once while watching it. This is also our #1 worst movie of 2014.

3) "Interstellar" - One of the most promising movies of 2014 was also one of our biggest letdowns. When you promote a movie for over a year, you better make damn sure it's a winner. It's unfair to say we didn't like "Interstellar" because the first two-thirds of the movie are excellent, filled with wonderful visuals, a stellar soundtrack and amazing practical effects, but the last third of the movie is a complete and utter waste. We have no problem suspending our disbelief while watching movies, but when a film spends 2 hours throwing science jargon in our faces and beefing up its plot with sci-fi mumbo-jumbo, "only to turn around and flip science on its head in pursuit of fantasy, it loses a little bit of its momentum for us." It's okay to admit when he's wrong, Nolanites.

2) "Lucy" - 2014 was a horrible wasteland of weak and awful roles for women, which is unfortunate to say the least. I was so looking forward to watching Scarlett Johansson kick ass and take names in the action sci-fi "Lucy," but this was a flop, too. "This is going to be one of those movies where people annoyingly say "if you didn't like it, you just didn't understand it." Well, tough shit, you're wrong. We may not have liked what was being asked of us, to further a scientific fallacy all in the name of entertainment, but it's just not a very good movie on top of that." This quote from our original review and it says it all. What a waste of talent.

1) "Sin City: A Dame to Kill For" - Waiting almost 10 years for the highly anticipated sequel to a fantastic movie, only to have it be complete and utter crap, is a movie lover's worst nightmare, and we found that in the form of "Sin City: A Dame to Kill For." Everything about this sequel is different, and even the "cool" look of it seemed altered from the original. There's no heart and no soul in this movie. There is so much unused potential that it's sad. It's uninspired. There's no "spark" like there was in the original. It's an utter disappointment and completely underwhelming. At least this film taught us to think twice before we get excited about a sequel to one of our favorite movies.

Movie Review: "The Gambler" (2014)

Image Souce

Movie: "The Gambler"
Director: Rupert Wyatt
Rating: R
Running Time: 1 hour, 51 minutes

Jim Bennett (Mark Wahlberg) is a university literature professor and the grandson of one of the wealthiest men in California. Jim is also a high-stakes gambler who has found himself $260,000 in debt to two separate but equally dangerous loan sharks. He now has 7 days to pay off these debts, or it could cost him his life. 

We left "The Gambler" feeling mixed about the movie. The character of Jim Bennett isn't the most likable guy in the world. He has had a privileged upbringing and makes a six-figure income, and yet he is willing to squander it all and risk not only his own life but the lives of the people he is supposed to care about, for a couple hands of Blackjack or a spin on the roulette wheel. He spends his day pontificating and espousing his ideas about life and being and having the greatness to his students, but then he'll turn around and say something about how he knows he's on a path to self-destruction. Bennett is truly an arrogant and self-centered man who is not part of a great movie remake, anyway. While there is some other definite standout acting by the likes of the great John Goodman and his brilliant "fuck you" speech, as well as Michael Kenneth Williams, who serves as this movie's bad guys in the form of loan sharks, "The Gambler" suffers from the "if we don't buy the main character, it's hard to overlook the movie's believability" syndrome. Mark Wahlberg as an experienced literature professor and apparent needer of waxing poetic? The gambling part, sure, but the teaching park? We just don't buy it coming from Marky Mark! Really, he's just a whiny pseudo-intellectual with an obvious penchant for screwing his students. This time, the person in his sights is Brie Larson, who is wholly underutilized as Bennett's student and love interest Amy. She doesn't have enough screen time, and this is to the film's detriment.

Coming from personal experience, the life of a gambler is not a glorious one. This movie makes no bones about the fact that it sucks to be in debt, and that it sucks to owe loan sharks, and that it sucks to have almost enough to pay off your debts but then dump it all on one last spin of the slot machine. But then, on the flip side, in the end, gambling walks away from it all glorified, not vilified, as it should be. Knowing someone who is a gambler will teach you a thing or two about how not to live your life. Gambling kills people, and maybe not in the literal sense of the word, but it breaks people down, dollar by dollar, cent by cent until there's nothing left except the car that houses them. It's a thrill, we get that having been to Las Vegas, and judging by this movie, it's a dangerous thrill to be addicted to. Getting sucked into the flashing lights and clanging coins, seeing the plumes of cigarette smoke rise up from the crowds that are watching you win and lose and come up and come down on your spirit, it's a frenetic experience, but the movie can't have it both ways, which it attempts to do over and over again, hindering our overall feelings of the film itself. All in all, there are better movies out there to watch and we will eventually get around to seeing the original with James Caan, which we hear is slightly better.

My Rating: 6/10
BigJ's Rating: 6.5/10
IMDB's Rating: 6.3/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 46%
Do we recommend this movie: Sure, why not?

Netflix Mail Day Movie Review: "Won't Back Down" (2012)

Image Source

Movie: "Won't Back Down"
Director: Daniel Barnz
Year: 2012
Rating: PG
Running Time: 2 hours, 1 minute

Jamie Fitzpatrick (Maggie Gyllenhaal) has a dyslexic daughter who is not getting the proper education or attention from the complacent teachers at her local public school. She asks to have her daughter transferred to the class of Nona Albert (Viola Davis), but the administration will not allow it. This school has been rated with an "F" for many years. In an effort to make the school better for their kids, Jamie and Nona use a little known law that will allow them to appeal to the school board to essentially take over the failing Adams elementary school. They quickly realize this is an uphill battle and must overcome a mountain of bureaucracy and a mud-slinging teacher's union to do it. 

This film certainly has an agenda and is not subtle about it. The goal of it is very similar to the documentary "Waiting for Superman," in that public schools in general are barely getting by and that unions only serve to protect the incompetent. Alternatively, charter schools with non-union teachers are the blanket solution to this epidemic. "Won't Back Down" doesn't explore any gray areas at all. Malia's teacher is portrayed as not only indifferent to her individual struggles, but is also downright mean and hateful towards both her and her mother, too. The principal, played by Bill Nunn, doesn't seem concerned whether or not the students of his school pass or fail, and even then, he only does the minimum amount of work necessary to get paid. He seems to only have sympathy for the incompetent teachers who contribute to his school's failure. The teachers union has been turned into the villain of this movie, showing that it is only concerned with money and protecting the jobs of those who should be fired. It also makes clear that if believes no teacher should ever have to work past the end of the school day. To us, this is not a full representation of how it always is when dealing with public schools. Sure, there are school exactly like this in the country, but it doesn't bring to light the true root of the issue, which does way beyond bad teachers and poor administration.  The film itself does a fantastic job trying to rile up emotions within its viewers to its cause and we do feel sympathetic for Malia, as well as Jamie and her frustration with all of the bureaucracy she has to deal with to get her kid a decent education. We really do hate Malia's teacher, and if I ever had a kid that had a teacher like that, I'd slug that teacher and not feel bad about it.

This film involves a touchy subject for BigJ, as his mother was a public school teacher for over 25 years in a lower income area of the city. Despite being a member of a union, she often stayed after school and always brought her papers home to create lesson plans during the weekend and during her vacation time. Her day never truly ended at 3:00 with the sound of the bell. She truly worked for her kids and cared about them all equally. She was a tough teacher, pushing her kids to be and do their best. Yes, there are bad teacher out there in the country and there are probably some that deserve to get fired, too, but this movie is definitely too one-sided without showing any in between. There are no questions, there are no concerns as to whether or not the characters in the film are making the right choices by attempting to start a charter school on their own. Education reform is a touchy subject to say the least, and this movie just doesn't cut it. Even with a tremendous cast who performs well, it just isn't informed enough to make an unbiased, not glorified film all while coming off as overly preachy to boot.

My Rating: 5.5/10
BigJ's Rating: 5/10
IMDB's Rating: 6.4/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 33%
Do we recommend this movie: Meh.