Pitch Perfect: NR #28

Well, I didn't see anything last week, and I didn't see any big movies that came out this week, but I did see a movie that came out earlier this month. The closest thing I can compare to this film is "Mean Girls", why? Let's find out in my review of...

Let's Begin

PLOT

Beca is a freshman at Barden College, after being kicked out of many other colleges. Why was she kicked out? Because she thinks college is stupid and is 100% convinced that she will go to L.A. and become a D.J. Her dad, one of the teachers at the college, gives her a proposition, If she really tries to study and get involved at college after one year and still wants to go to L.A., he'll pay for the whole thing. She decides to join an all girls archapello group called the Bellas. With her spunk and new world attitude, she helps transform the Bellas from a 50's-90's stale group, to a modern remix group.

PROS

The movie is very funny. While it starts out with more misses than hits, it gets better as it goes along, but even at the beginning, when it hits, it really hits.

The movie never goes too mean-spirited and actually has a heart. It would have been really easy just to make it a mean-spirited cheap joke teen flick, but it goes above and beyond that.

The singing and archapello is very good and well done. A lot of the songs were ones that I hate, yet they found a way to make me love them.

The side characters are what make the film. They may not be too developed, but they all have a little quirk that keep the jokes coming. My favorite was a little quiet Asian girl who whenever she talks, she says some of the most weird, messed-up, and hilarious stuff in the film.

CONS

Beca is an extremely unlikable character. She's a whinny girl that acts like she's better than everyone else and gets angry at people for no reason. Even when she learns her lesson, I still hated her.

CONCLUSION

Now why is this like "Mean Girls"? Well I expected it to suck, to be another shallow, no thrills teen comedy used to cash in on the "Glee" craze. It turned out to be a clever, heart-felt film that only gets better and better. While it has an ok first half, the second half literally had me in tears. I hate vomit jokes, and the joke I laughed the hardest at was a vomit joke! Overall, it's a fun movie that stays entertaining.

RATING

WALK TO 

Argo: NR #27

Ben Affleck sure has turned his career around hasn't he? He started out as a horrible to sub-par actor whose only claim to fame was as a co-writer, oh yeah, and he dated J-Lo. Yet ever since he left her behind, he's become not only a good actor, but found his true talent behind the camera as a director. Now the only one of his directed movie's I've seen has been "The Town", which I loved. So you can guess my excitement when I heard about his new film. Is it any good, or is Affleck a two hit wonder? Let's find out in my review of...

  Let's Begin

PLOT

Taking place during the Iranian hostage situation of the late 70's, the film follows Tony Mendaes, an FBI agent who's job is to get people out of dangerous situations, who has to help six american's who escaped capture and are now hiding out at the Canadian ambassador's house. With little to no options left, Tony decides that the best plan is to make a fake movie. In claiming to make a fake "Star Wars" ripoff called "Argo", the six american's can disguise themselves as a Canadian film crew and get out of the country. 

PROS

The actors in this film do an amazing job. Everyone get's a moment to shine and never overshadow's anyone else's suburp performance.

The film's script and dialogue is its biggest strength. It not only is engaging and interesting, but it's also very funny, mixing the humor and drama perfectly.

Now I was not alive during this period in history, and I didn't even know this happened until this film was released, and the they convey the situation very well. At the beginning, they show the U.S. embassy getting overrun by the Iranian's, and I was honestly frightened, as was the world at this time.

Tension is one of this movie's many specialities. I was a little tense throughout the whole movie, but never sacred. The last 30 min. had me scared, so tense that a heart shaped piece of skin popped out of my chest every 2 seconds. 

Luckily, the comedy in this movie helps relieve the tension in the first and second halves of the film. I missed a ton of dialogue just thinking about some of the lines said in this film.

Every hostage is well developed and act realistically. While this may seem like a no brainer, sometimes movies just leave out those little details that "Argo" get's across in very little time. It makes those last 30 min. even more exhilarating.

Affleck's attention to detail is incredible. The film is shot in a way that is very reminiscent of movies from the 70's, with film grain and everything. The sets are also very detailed, only filled with stuff an average person from the 70's would have.

CONS

All of my problems with this film are tiny nit-picks that barely affect it as a whole.

CONCLUSION

What a way to start off Oscar season. This is the true sign of Affleck's talent, not only as a director but also as an actor. I was sucked in by this movie, never feeling bored are looking at my watch. I can't wait to see what Affleck does next, and to any upcoming Oscar contenders, I hope you bring your A game x2, cause "Argo" just blew it out of the water. I would suggest you see this film, which I do, but I'd rather you support "Sinister", the new horror movie that came out this week. While I would have seen it, I'm not above the age of 17 and I don't know anyone above that age that would see it. Why do I want everyone to go see it? Let me put it like this. I hate, HATE, being scared, that's why most of the Horror movies I see are more focused on comedy or gore. This movie was intended to be rated PG-13, but the MPAA gave it an R because it was too scary to show to teenagers, and yet this is my most anticipated films of this year. So please, GO SEE THIS MOVIE, then go see "Argo" right after, ok? ok.

RATING

RUN TO!

Taken 2: NR #26

This was one of most anticipated and dreaded films of this year. I loved the first Taken, it was simple, stupid, yet incredibly fun and entertaining. It also introduced me and many other teens to Liam Neeson. Now four years later and we have the sequel. Can an inventive concept and an actor keep this sequel a float? Let's find out in my review of...

 Let's Begin

PLOT

As we all know, Liam Nees- I mean Bryan Mills, killed a TON of people in the last film. Well the extended families of those henchmen are pissed. They now have one mission, kill Mills. So what do they do? They kidnap him and his ex-wife while they're in Istanbul and attempt to kidnap his daughter. Bryan must now direct his daughter to find him, free him, and get revenge of those who've taken his family.

PROS

I laughed at a couple of points...at unintentionally funny points.... that's the nicest thing I can say...

CONS

Let's review on what made "Taken" great. It had a simple yet effective plot, the villains were truly evil, Liam Neeson still had moves and killed/maimed people in awesome ways, and while it had its stupid moments, it was still fun. "Taken 2" doesn't get it.

The plot is creative and could have been interesting, but the families just become generic Middle Eastern villains and that setup never goes anywhere.

The film's logic is so stupid, a person who's never been out side their home would say it doesn't make sense. Example: Neeson is directing his daughter on how to find him. He uses ways that don't make sense, but I can suspend my disbelief. Then, he tells her to throw a grenade in a random direction so he can use it as echo location... if you can't find what's wrong with that logic, than you need more help than I can give.

The action scenes in the first "Taken", while not perfectly shot, you could still tell what's going on. Here, I had so many points after Neeson fought someone that I went "WHAT?!?!" The camera is set on everyone's chest in extreme close-ups that you can never tell what's going on.

The ex-wife is one of the most useless characters in film history. She literally adds nothing to the plot and could have been edited out of the film entirely.

I would complain that Neeson wasn't in there enough, but when he finally gets his badass moment, it was boring and predictable. You sit there for the first hour or so wanting Neeson to do something, but instead you get him yelling directions at his daughter, and I already explained what happens after that hour or so.

CONCLUSION

This is the definition of a cash-grab. It adds nothing to story, makes little sense, and probably would've gone straight to DVD if Liam Neeson hadn't come back. While not the worst movie I've ever seen, it has nothing that deserves your time and money. Go see "Looper" or "Hotel Transylvania" instead.

RATING

RUN AWAY!

     

Looper/Hotel Transylvania NR #24,25 DOUBLE REVIEW!!!

Today is the triumphed return of DOUBLE REVIEWS!!! The movies I'm reviewing today have one thing in common, they were both released this weekend. That's literally it, one is an adult Sci-Fi action-thriller for smart people, and the other is an Adam Sandler animated comedy, cause that went so well last time (Insert "Eight Crazy Nights" poster here). The question is, are they any good? Let's find out in my DOUBLE REVIEW of...

 Let's Begin X2

LOOPER:

PLOT

In the year 2044, Joe is a Looper, a hitman hired by the mob to kill people from the future. Let me explain, time travel is not possible is 2044, but in 30 years it will be, and it will be instantly outlawed. Obviously, the mob starts using it to kill problems, since forensics is so advanced it's impossible to get away with murder, unless you kill someone who technically doesn't exist. But, they also have a way of ending their "contract" called "Closing your loop". This is where the mob sends back your future self, you kill them, gain a TON of money and never work for the mob again, knowing full well that you'll be killed in 30 years. One day, Joe meets his future self, and allows Old Joe to escape. Now Joe is on the run from the mob and is chasing Old Joe, who is also hunted by the mob, to kill him and live a free life.

PROS

Joseph Gordon-Levitt is one of my favorite up and coming actors, and he does not disappointing here. He has to play a young Bruce Willis, and does a great job. He gets all of Willis's mannerisms down, even having slight adjustments to his face to look even more like Willis. He also acts his butt off.

Bruce Willis is a joy to watch, as he always is, this time showing emotions other than "grizzled".

Jeff Daniels plays the mob boss Abe, and is one of the best parts of the movie. He's the kind of villain you love to hate.

I love the film's portrayal of the near future, where it looks like modern day but with a few things that make it different. It seems realistic and grounded in reality.

The time travel aspect is very simple, and that actually works well for the film. Instead of spending an hour trying to explain to you high concepts, it just gives you the basics and rolls with it. They even have a joke where they explain that they don't even now how it works, and you should just not think about it, cause they aren't.

The film has a lot of cool and unique camera shots and ways of portraying the story. One great scene is when we first see Joe use a drug you insert into your eye like eye-drops, and the camera stays on Joe's head as he moves around, but is spinning around and makes it feel cool yet disorienting.

The movie, though advertised as a serious action film, is actually quite comedic and human. There are many funny scenes, and many more where people act like real people and have human moments. 

The moral dilemmas the film brings up are very well integrated and help to keep the film in a moral grey area. No one is right or wrong, the film just shows you who these people are and what they do and has you decide.

CONS

There are a few unneeded characters that bog down the film with back stories and filler scenes.

CONCLUSION 

You may think I've said too many good things, I think I've just barely scratched the surface. The reason I don't go into deeper detail is because the second and third halves of the film, the ones thankfully not shown in the trailer, is something I don't want to spoil. If I could, this review would go on even longer. I loved this film and think it's one of the best films of the year, certainly in the top 5. See this original, innovative, and awesome movie.

RATING

RUN TO!

  

HOTEL TRANSYLVANIA

PLOT

Dracula is a single dad with a daughter he loves very much, and always wants to protect her. He also wants a place where monsters can spend a vacation without fear of humans. So he compromises and creates Hotel Transylvania, a safe castle for his daughter, and for the monsters of the world. Dracula's daughter, Mavis, has just turned 118 (18 years old in human years) and all of Dracula's old pals and many, many, many other monsters are invited to the party. Mavis, Dracula's daughter, wants to see the world and meet people her age. Luckily, Dracula has started to convince her that humans are evil, but hilarity strikes when extreme white guy, Jonathan, stumbles upon the hotel and put's Dracula's business and trust in jeopardy. Worst of all, Mavis falls for him as well. Dracula then disguises Jon and hopes no one notices, and hilarity ensues.

PROS

Genndy Tartakovsky, creator of awesome cartoons Dexter's Laboratory and Samurai Jack, is the director of this film, and his influence is obvious. The animation is amazing, not only looking beautiful but also looking fluid and having something always going on the background.

The humor, thankfully, is not like most Sandler movies, since he's only involved in voice acting. The humor has the style and timing of an old Lonney Tunes cartoon, and is hilarious. While it does have some jokes fall flat and low-brow humor, it still works and some of the low-brow humor is actually funny. They have one fart joke in the whole film, and it's actually funny.

The cast of this movie is just Sandler and his friends, which usually leads to disaster. But since they aren't ad-libbing all their lines and are actually reading from a script,  they do a good job. Mostly because they are close friends, they really convey that through their acting. The stand-out this time, surprisingly, is Sandler himself. He conveys a lot of emotion and seems heart-felt whenever talking to his daughter. 

The plot is very simple, but that's a good thing. Tartakovsky basically came in a re-worked the script to make the story simpler, and it let's the film focus on the human side of things and focus on the hilarious comedy.

Creativity is pouring out of every frame of this movie. The character designs, the jokes, everything is creative and almost unique.

CONS

Like every kids movie these days, there's a dance number at the end. I will give it points for a using an original song, but it still annoyed me.

CONCLUSION

It's funny and horrifying to think how this film would have turned out if Tartaovsky did not have his hand in this, because he saves this film and makes it a great Halloween movie for kids, yet still enjoyable for adults. This is the remake of Franken and Bass's "Mad Monster Party", and I enjoyed every minute of it. Definitely the right movie to get you in the Halloween spirit.

RATING

WALK TO.

  

Scapegoat Wax: YMNK #7

Before the start of the Summer, I may have had 80, 90, 100 if I was lucky, songs on my i-Pod. It wasn't that I didn't like music, I just hadn't found the right band and couldn't be bothered to explore and discover new music. Than I listened to Amy Winehouse's "Back to Black". I was floured and started to discover all types of new music. Today's YMNK is about the first band/group that I bought an entire album for, a band that basically got me through the Summer. You May Not Know about...

 Scapegoat Wax is a band I'm not a hundred percent sure how to describe. The best I can do is Rap and R&B, but they're a lot more diverse than that. The group was started back in the late 90's in Chico, California by Marty James and Johnny Z, though Johnny left shortly after. The group lasted until the early 2000's, where they broke-up. In that time, they released three CD's and were apart of three different record labels. They never got very popular, only having one of their songs reaching moderate success. Marty James continues to make music in a new band called "One Block Radius", which I have yet to hear any of their work.

 The one song that became popular was "Aisle 10 (Hello Alison)", which became famous because it was on the soundtrack for the excellent game "Jet Set Radio Future" or "JSRF". This is also where I first heard the band. Listen to the song below, than go back to reading this. Do it...NOW!

I had this song on my I-pod forever, until a few months ago, I bit the bullet and bought their second album (thinking it was the first) "Okeeblow". I immediately fell in love. I loved the voices, the sounds, the lyrics, everything about them. I consider "Okeeblow" a perfect album, There is no song on that album that I don't at least like.

 One interesting thing I noticed about the songs is that whenever they're about love, besides "Aisle 10" it's always negative. Marty James must have had a huge, devastating break-up because for five years, he sang about one girl. The songs are always about either the break-up, wanting her back, happy that they broke-up, or that she still haunts him to this day. Every song but "Aisle 10". That one is about him really wanting Alison, which is the only positive love song in Scapegoat Wax's short history.

 What about their two other albums? Well, they aren't as perfect. "Luxurious", their first album, mostly has the songs from Okeeblow, but the original/mix versions. I personally feel the ones on Okeeblow and Swax are better, the ones edited... Anyway, Scapegoat Wax had a problem where their albums had a LOT of the same songs, with the best put into Okeeblow. Don't get me wrong, Luxurious has some great songs, one of them being me favorites, but only six of them are new, out of 19 total songs. Swax, their third album, only has 12 songs, five of which are new. The worst part is that, in my opinion, their's only one good song, "Both My Freinds", which has quickly become one of, if not my favorite, Scapegoat Wax songs.

   But don't let this discourage you, I still highly advise buying "Okeeblow" and buying the other songs as well, who knows, maybe you'll love the ones I hate. Overall, Scapegoat Wax is an amazing, heartfelt, underrated band that really feel fresh when compared to today's top 20 "hits". Just please don't pirate the songs. I don't know if Marty James or anyone who was involved still gets the money, but until I do find out, please pay for this amazing music.

Summer of Movies #1: The Godfather

This is it people, the last movie. Its been a long, hard, journey turned into a short, tedious, trip. I had a lot of fun, and found love for many new films. But today's film is the one everyone talks about, the one you know and love. If you've yet to guess it by now, than I guess you didn't read the title. This is my final Summer review of...

PLOT

In 1940-50's New York City, their are five mafia families, the most influential of the five is the Corleone family, run by Vito Corleone. But the family soon starts to decline as they struggle to find control.

PROS

Marlion Brando as Vito Corleone is simply breathtaking. I had never seen Brando perform on film before this point, and I was simply blown away.

Al Pacino as Micheal is great, but shocking considering what he is today. He plays the character so shy and unsuspecting, unlike everything else he did after this film.

The film is very violent, even though it's fairly tame. What I mean is that the movie is very quiet and conversation based, so whenever it gets violent, it takes you by surprise and shocks you, even though what it shows could be put in a PG-13 movie today.

The writing and script is amazing. It's seems realistic and has so many great lines.

CONS

I feel like there is a lot of left out information. I know that Part 2 is a prequel, so maybe if I watch that, things will make sense, but that movie is 4 hours and 30 min... Yeah, screw that.

CONCLUSION

Let me be honest for a second. I was disappointing by this film. Don't get me wrong, I still loved it and thought it was great, but I just wasn't blown away. I think that my expectations were so high that no matter what I got, it wouldn't live up to them. This is a great film, defiantly worth checking out, just don't get your hopes up too high.

RATING

RUN TO

Summer of Movies #2: Citizen Kane

Now that you now what #2 is, I'm pretty sure you can guess what #1 is, and you can guess it as long as you have a parent or was alive during or after the 70's. But we're not talking about that movie, no we're talking about the movie that is either right behind or just ahead of that movie. But you've never heard of it because no one went to see it because it was too ahead of its time, literally this is considered one of the biggest financial flops in film, yet the most critical praised film to this day. I'm talking about...

PLOT

We begin our film with a man on his death bed as he utters one of the most famous, cryptic, and well known spoilers in history, "Rosebud". This man was Charles Foster Kane, one of the biggest newspaper owners in existence, an extremely influential man, a man who was just as hated as he was loved, and a very complex man. Because of his extremely high status, a group of reporters are going crazy trying to find out what Kane's last words meant. One reporter decides to investigate by asking the people Kane was closest to, as we are shown Kane's interesting life.

PROS

This was Orson Welles's dream project. He had a hand in everything, directing, writing, producing, acting, cinematography, even the editing, and he pulls each area off flawlessly. The writing is amazing and leads to some insanely detailed and well-rounded characters, the stand-out being Kane

The acting is also amazing, with everyone doing a great job, which is funny since most of the actors had only done radio up to this point, including Welles, who once again kills it as Charles Kane. He doesn't seem like Orson Welles playing a character, it seems like Charles Kane is a real, living person, all thanks to Welles

One surprising thing about this film is that it's known as one of the biggest advancements in special effects, which surprising considering that this is a character/story driven movie. Well the special effects are so well done in that they are used to do things only imagined at this point in terms of camera movements and make-up. All the actors play their old and younger selves, and the make-up is just so effective that it was hard for me to tell that they had make-up on.

This film plays with shadows and camera shots in so interesting ways that even I, a guy that can barely tell the difference between camera lenses, was filled with awe.

The character of Charles Foster Kane, and his story, is so complex and so well done that it's just interesting to wonder and speculate just what is going on in his head, even though he's a fictional character. He is the definition of a character who leaps off the page, or in this case the screen. 

CONS

Do I even dare? I mean, this is considered the greatest film of all time. Luckily, I couldn't one flaw!

CONCLUSION

This is the definition of living up to the hype. All my life I'd heard only amazing things about this film was, how all other "great films" were compared to it, the joke of "Well it's not 'Citizen Kane'" was thrown out, and yet it somehow lived up to all of my expectations. And even though you probably already know the twist, the journey is just so entertaining that the twist doesn't even matter. Please, do yourself a favor and watch this film. It's one of the most influential and timeless pieces of entertainment in our history. While it's not in my personal top 10 films of all time, it's certainly a close 11.

RATING

CAN'T LIVE WITHOUT!!!!!