Dawn of the Planet of the Apes: Ok, Seriously, Why Doesn't Anyone Call Them Monkeys?

Seriously, the word "monkey" maybe happens once. Why. Does anyone in real life ever actually use the term "ape???"

Anyway.

So, disclaimer going into this review: I saw this movie on about 4 hours of sleep and I've been seeing nothing but action movies lately, so my opinion may be slightly skewed. However, I've got to say that I wasn't crazy impressed by anything but the aesthetic of this movie and I don't understand why everyone is stopping the presses talking about how "AMAZINGG!!?@" it is.

I mean the poster art is cool and all but...

The movie basically picks up where the first (remake) left off. Sort of. In the time following the first movie's progress there has been an outbreak of what is called "simian flu" (people getting reeeal creative with all these various 'flus' popping up all over the film industry...). As a result, the human population is a mere fraction of what it once was. By contrast, when we meet up with our ole pal Caesar (voiced by Andy Serkis, the guy who made Gollum so famous..), his ape community is thriving. They've been living in the forest for upwards of 15 years and thriving as they develop ways to communicate via sign language as well as voice, albeit primitively in the case of the latter. Their world is shaken up, however, with the arrival of a human scouting group looking for an old dam that could provide electricity to their severely diminished city community. After the arrival of the humans, old prejudices arise and threaten human survival as well as peace between the apes.

Let's start with the good things about this thing: um, it's beautiful. The CGI effects are straight crazy. Straight. Crazy. Especially in the more villainous characters, who you can tell they had a grand ole time creating.

PS He's not real. He was made by a computer.

Just a small reminder in case you forgot.

The acting isn't bad either. Nice to see Keri Russell picking up a big role again and Gary Oldman is always fun to watch. New guy Jason Clarke is...eh okay.

But other than that I found this movie to be hugely predictable. From the overly-humanist (speciesist?) character that is all about shooting all of the apes down before they can hurt the human population to the apes that are basing all of their interactions with humans on their tortured lab days, we got nothing new under the sun here. It's a very basic "fear of the other" principle that meets its predictable conclusions at the end: wow, both humans and apes are neither wholly good nor wholly evil.

Yeah I'm bored.

I also found the usage of another pandemic in the film to be boring. From Resident Evil to I am Legend to Godzilla to Walking Dead, we've all seen the broken-down visages of cities that have experienced huge drops in population. Overrun with vines, dirty, lack of government, etc. etc... Seent it. Gimme something different.

More power to them for trying to make a bigger message out of an enormously predictable plot. (I mean...we ALL know that the apes eventually win.) But it's such a tired, used, plot that the movie ends up being kind of...-sigh-...boring...

It's only been like 15 years. Even Chernobyl doesn't look this run-down...good lord...

I dunno. Maybe I'm jaded from watching too many action movies lately, or else I'm spoiled by having watched a bunch of futuristic dystopian movies that have been way more impressive, but I found Planet of the Apes to be a little lackluster.

Conclusion: 6.5 outa 10. Shmeh. Didn't hate it but still can't understand what the huge reaction to it has been. Obviously none of those people saw any of The Hobbit films...

Frozen: Yes. It is THAT Good.

Hello, my dears. I apologize for being absent since whenever the heck the last time was that I wrote on here (two weeks? a month? never?) but I just saw Frozen last week and wanted to take a minute to reassure everyone that:

Yes. It is that good.

For weeks I have been hearing my previous babysittees, fellow Disney enthusiasts, and award shows sing (sometimes literally) the praises of this film and I FINALLY found someone to go see it with me last week.

The movie is set in Scandinavia, in a land called Arondelle, where two little princesses live with their royal parents. On a night where the younger of the two, Anna, can't sleep, she wakes up her older sister, Elsa, and tries to persuade her to build a snowman. As the two escape downstairs, Elsa reveals that she has magical powers that enable her to make snow and ice. Even though they are merely playing, Elsa accidentally hits Anna in the head with some of her magic. Although the crisis is quickly averted by the king and queen, they decide to hide the two girls away from the world, urging Elsa to conceal her powers. Anna has no memory of Elsa's special gift and so is confused by her sister's cold manner (see what I did there?) for years. Years later, when it is time for Elsa to step up as queen, she accidentally reveals her powers to her kingdom and, in turn, runs away from Arondelle to protect both herself and others. Anna then makes it her mission to find her, repair their broken relationship, and to persuade her to thaw the winter that Elsa unintentionally brought upon their town.

Along the way Anna makes friends with a prince named Hans, a guy named Kristoff, his reindeer Sven, and a talking snowman named Olaf.

SO! What I liked about this movie:

-MUSIC MUSIC MUSIC: there is a reason that this movie won some stuff at that awards show two weeks ago (one week ago? a week and a half ago?). All of the songs in the film harken back to the Golden Age of Disney animation back in the 90s, and for one spectacular reason: you can tell that they were thinking Broadway when they made this. In the same way that Beauty and the Beast, The Lion King, and The Little Mermaid all became smash-hits on Broadway, Disney seems to have anticipated its success and prepared for this musical ahead of time. Boasting Idina Menzel of Wicked and a surprisingly versatile Kristen Bell, all of the songs in this film are incredibly catchy. And not in that annoying "Call Me Maybe" kind of way.

Frozen: The Musical (no I did not make this)

-Girl lessons: How many people are going feminist these days? Yep. Lots. And Disney doesn't seem to have taken this for granted. As a girl that wrote an embarrassingly long paper on a feminist reading of The Swan Princess, I've got to say that it's nice to see a movie that tells girls, "Hey. Sometimes finding true love is as easy as looking at your family tree. And not at prince that you've only known for, like, a day." It's also about rejecting traditional fantastical plot lines and introducing ones that are more realistic. After all, you wouldn't want your kids to grow up thinking that marrying a guy that has never heard you speak (The Little Mermaid), has only hung out with you once (Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, Cinderella), and/or needs to rescue you all the time (too many.) is commonplace.

Girl power. Just like the Spice Girls always said.

-Olaf the Talking Snowman: Such a huge part of kid movies' appeal is an entertaining cast. But where Disney frequently ups the ante is its inclusion of the adults that are so frequently watching these movies with their kids (or, y'know, weird 24-year-olds that really like cartoons...ahem...). When I first saw the preview for Frozen a few months ago I actually cringed. I was like "Crap. A great plot; sounds interesting; and they had to incorporate a stupid talking snowman. Great. Why not just call it Snowbuddies 12." Honestly...I have never been so wrong. Olaf is a key reason why I liked this movie. In fact, I would say the personalities of all of the characters in general are just ultra-relatable for a kids' movie. Their optimistic attitudes aren't the ditz-prince interactions that we're used to. These guys have substance. But are still hilarious. And I like that.

hahaha, omg, this guy...

In conclusion: go see Frozen. And embrace YouTubing all of the various songs in it, because they're going to become the new ones that you belt in your car.

8.5 outa 10.


I'm gonna do something crazy and just show you guys this song, because all of the trailers aren't very good. Enjoy!

The Hunger Games Again: Catching Fire Indeed.

Okay. So. For those of you that hadn't read my review of the first film, The Hunger Games (here), I was unimpressed. It wasn't a bad movie, but it lacked a lot of the emotional integrity that the book had.

That being said, I was totally blown away by Catching Fire. In a rare event that only special sequels like Toy Story 2 and The Dark Knight get to enjoy, Catching Fire joins the ranks of sequels that are even better than their predecessors. And that ain't no easy feat.

Let's get into the "why," shall we?

I mean, come on. Even the promo art is better.

This movie picks up where the first one left off. Katniss has been living back in District 12 and is about to go on a tour of the 12 Districts with Peeta as part of their victory. But things are not all as quiet as she would've hoped. Before they leave on their tour, Katniss is visited by President Snow, who tells her that she and Peeta must convince the public that the way they left the games was because of their love for each other - not an act of defiance. After she promises to comply, the tour begins. But things only get worse. Riots and botched speeches give way to more conflict and, before they know it, they're back in the games that so haunted their lives the first time. Only this time with a twist. Competing against other tributes that have already won previous years, this round becomes the ultimate survival game.

As a side note can we talk about how all of Panem's propaganda posters

look like they were made in North Korea? (Coincidence?)

So wow. I tell ya what, wow. I didn't have my hopes high for this one, but the new director choice really served them well. (Francis Lawrence. Also, I feel it necessary to mention that a member of the audience shouted "BLESS YOU, FRANCIS LAWRENCE." at the end of the film. Yeah, it's that good.) Instead of vom-inducing shaky-camera, we've got a clear agenda going on here. Who knows if it's the fact that there aren't as many young children being killed in this one, but the action scenes were much more straightforward and SUSPENSEFUL. Each shot was made with more attention and details didn't seem as sugar-coated as in the original. The action part really gets fulfilled where the first one seemed a little unsure of itself

So much action!

(Couldn't find an action shot. Apologies.)

Another layer that seemed to form in this newest installment was the development of the characters. The ones I had considered largely miscast in the first one really seem to come into their own in this film. Jennifer Lawrence, who I thought played Katniss a little too cold in the first one, really becomes a full-bodied character in this one. Her experiences from the first games really seem to haunt her convincingly in this ones, as she finds it hard to emotionally separate herself from things that the state has told her to do. And Josh Hutcherson (bless his short little stature), goes from a lovesick puppy dog to a guy that you'd buy has legitimate feelings for this girl. While in Hunger Games he seemed full of big dopey stares and a questionable level of devotion, his experiences with Katniss in the first games make his love a little more believable and a lot more understanding. (God I love them together. Always was Team Peeta.)

Sorry, Lenny, still not buying you as Cinna. 

Get out of these movies, please.

Beyond all of the acting and cinematography, though, the story in this one is better pronounced as a film this time around. The first book isn't totally action-driven. There's a lot of internal monologue and confusion and waiting and sleeping in trees. But the second book, and this movie, are fueled by constant action and character interaction. Additionally, a lot of the smaller details that I skimmed over while I was busy devouring the second book are fully recognized visually in the movie so that they make more sense ("tick tock," ahem, ahem, and that whole set-up my fellow pre-readers).

The whole film, really is just so much more BADASS. While the first movie seems to take its time getting to know all of the various characters and special situations, it doesn't ever seem to dive right into the heart of the problem. But this one does. Blame it on the subject matter being of a "greater good" kind of depth as the series continues, but Catching Fire had me biting my nails waiting for the tension to subside. The whole idea of revolt really powers through and, even in the face of incredible diversity, the resilience of people in this is just really touching. Maybe that's the other thing that gives this movie more depth than its predecessor: the fact that friendships and bonds are made. And the fact that these bonds are interrupted by something as maniacal as their government only serves to fuel the fire of their revolution.

8.5 outa 10. I really loved it. Might even go see it again.

Also, I have to show you this:

"How should I know? I'm just a piece of bread." Oh my god, I died.

Happy: Where Does It Come From and How Can We Get It?

Just watched a fantastic documentary that I found on Netflix called Happy. The film explores what it is that makes human beings happy, exploring international cultures and taking a look at scientific research,  as well as turning the lens back on the USA.

Here are some fascinating things that I learned from this movie, in no particular order:

-Only 10% of happiness depends on things like money, material comfortability and the like. By contrast, about 50% (FIFTY PERCENT) of happiness relies on genetics. The remaining 40% is up to you.

-Denmark is one of the happiest countries in the world, which could possibly have something to do with nationalized education and healthcare, but they also look into examining something call house-sharing, which is a bit like living in a commune or hostel. Everyone has their own small house but they share meals and grow up under one roof.

Looks like this.

-Japan is one of the most hardworking countries in the world, which can sometimes lead to fatalities. After WWII and having to rebuild their economy from scratch, they were pushed to optimum efficiency. But that has taken an ugly turn, as in recent years they've even developed a new word ("karoshi") to mean literal death by stress.

-Interestingly enough, Japan's island Okanawa is home to more centurions than any other one place in the world. Studies show that it may have something to do with the fact that most are farmers, that they are surrounded constantly by family and friends, and that they have strong heritage roots.

-Bhutan is a country that is looking to boost its economy not by producing a massive GDP but by promoting national cultural identity.

Yep, I had no idea where Bhutan was either. Here it is!

-Materialism works as a treadmill. Once you gain more money, you quickly become accustomed to a new level of wealth, you raise the bar on your personal status quo, and you will forever be dissatisfied with how much you have because you can always have more.

-People do really good when really bad things happen. Adversity can help us to reach our full potential and helps us to count our blessings and realize what we have, thus making us more happy.

People are amazing.

-Counting the things that you are grateful for each week can make you happier.

-Throughout the movie, they talk about different things that human beings can do to boost happiness. Suggestions, backed by research that I don't have time or energy to rewind to, include doing community service (as helping other people helps us feel good about ourselves), having strong ties to friends and family, changing routine (anything as little as going a different route home to something as big as moving to Thailand), optimizing "flow" (what some refer to as "being in the zone" or concentrating really hard on a task that needs to be done), and doing things that you enjoy.

Really really fascinating movie that helps remind you that the economy isn't everything.

8 outa 10.

If you want to get more happiness in your life, the film has a website (here) that proposes a list of activities that you can integrate into your daily life to boost your own happiness. Good luck :)

Insidious Chapter 2: Because Apparently the First One was Chapter 1

In preparation for the newest Insidious movie, Nick and I turned on the first one as a refresher before our 10:40 screening of the sequel. Now, the first time I saw Insidious, I had been warned that it was some really freakin' scary stuff. And I got really scared. And it may have colored the movie for me. Maybe a little bit. But the thing that I like about this franchise (as, let's be honest, it will probably become after breaking the box office this weekend) is the element of the unknown. That being said, I think that the newest one is a little more conventionally scary than the last one was. But we'll get to that later.

YE BE WARNED: SINCE THIS MOVIE IS ENTIRELY BUILT ON THE FIRST INSTALLMENT, THERE WILL BE INSIDIOUS SPOILERS ALL OVER THIS THING. IT HAS BEEN SAID.

First off, plot:

The second film starts off right where the first one left off. That is, right after Elyse has been murdered. They even give you a convenient little recap of all of the events that happen in the last scene of the first one. So you see, once again, the wife looking, horrified, at the camera and finding Elyse dead. But after being questioned by the police, things seem to go pretty much back to normal for the family. For, like, a day. After both Renai and Lorraine start seeing entities in the house again, questions start to arise about Josh's personality. Is he being dismissive because he wants to move on? Or is there something in him that has a more INSIDIOUS agenda? (See what I did there?) After her suspicions are enforced by her worried son, Dalton, who can also sense that something is wrong with his father, they join forces with Lorraine, Elyse's team from the original film, and a new character named  to get to the bottom of what is haunting Josh and, more importantly, how they can stop it.

You ain't my daddy!

This movie was pretty scary. I was afraid to open doors when I got home because of all the freakin' jumps and random spirits that keep popping up everywhere. The cool thing about Insidious 2, is that you're already a little primed for the action that you're going to get because of the first movie. But don't get me wrong, there are a lot of twists and turns in this one that the original doesn't have. For instance, instead of "it's not your house that's haunted, it's your son," as the big shocker, there are a dozen little things that are going on in this one that almost make it seem more "thriller" than the first film felt. While there is undeniably something wrong with Josh, it takes almost the entire film to sort out the fine details and try to solve the problem.

"Are you really Josh? You can tell me. I promise I won't say anything."

Insidious 2 was, on the whole, pretty good. The only complaint that I would have is the ghosts. With the slight genre change, there also seems to be a different way that these ghosts interact with the living than in the first one. While we see agression and yelling from the creepy things in the first movie, the ghosts in this second installment seem to be a bit more articulate, and with more meaningful plot lines. I can't decide whether this helps or hurts the movie. It's almost more terrifying to have to deal with spirits that can't remember how to reason than with ones that are mercilessly messing with you on purpose. At the same time, it makes the mystery all that much more personal once they finally figure it out.

PS it has to do something with this person.

Bottom line: the way the plot unfolds is an improvement over the first one, but the main haunters in this movie are not as scary as the ones in the original.

7 outa 10. Pretty good horror movie, especially for a sequel.

DON'T FORGET TO ENTER FOR THE $25 FANDANGO GIFT CARD, GIVEAWAY ENTRY IN THE LAST POST! 

Elysium: What a Coincidence!

What else to do on a Sunday but go to the movies? Just discovered that the theater near where I've just moved is craaayyyyy. I kind of felt like I was in a movie theater from the future. The concessions stand had a digital soda fountain and the seats are assigned. Not to mention the fact that the seats are CUSHIONY RED RECLINING THINGS.

Seriously, how the hell did it take so long for 

someone to think of this?

But after I got over the initial shock of this spaceship facility, I settled down to watch tonight's feature, Elysium.

Elysium takes place in the future, 2154 to be precise, and at this point in time, Earth has been abandoned by the wealthy in favor of living in a space settlement called Elysium. While Earth is covered with disease, bad air, filth, and overpopulation, Elysium is immaculate and convenient, complete with robot servants and total healthcare machines that can cure anything from a paper cut to leukemia. We are shown the life of a guy that lives on Earth named Max. Raised by nuns, he grows up to become a bad boy stealing cars, but by the time we catch up with him he is reformed from all that and trying to make an honest living working at a factory that makes droids. After he gets stuck in a room where he's exposed to high levels of radiation one thing leads to another and he ends up hijacking the mind of an Elysian and being the one man that can change the futures of the people that live on both Earth and Elysium.

The wheeel in the skyyyy keeps on tuuurrrrniiiinnn

So woah, right off the bat there's a LOT of stuff going on in this movie. It got off to a pretty good start; they show you that robot police keep the citizens of Earth in order cruelly and without humanity, that people rely on thieving to get by, and that there's little to no promise of upward mobility. Interesting commentary. But then they introduce plot point after plot point and things get a little...over-ambitious.

Parallel to Max's story is the Elysian president's, focusing on her ruthless way of fighting refugees from gaining illegal access to Elysium, which is by blowing them up before they can land there. We also see   a whole string of events involving illegally employed agents from Elysium sent to "take care of" Max and other refugees, Max's childhood friend and her daughter, and computer hackers.

Another case of Could Have Been Cool But Wasn't. Sometimes you can't squish everything into a two-hour movie and this was definitely the case here. Instead of the story flowing as we get to know a little bit more about the characters, it seems to jump from conflict to conflict and coincidence from coincidence. Like:

"Oh crap, I have radiation poisoning, get me to Elysium, please!" 

"Well that is certainly convenient because I happen to have this chip where I can hack into the minds of the wealthy! I'll send you to hijack the vehicle of an Elysian and maybe we can find something useful in their minds to use for our own benefit!"

"Great! Let's get her installed!"

"Glad we could accomplish that despite the rampant disease and obvious lack of hygiene in this establishment (not to mention your progressive death from radiation poisoning). You have survived the installation of mind-hardware and mechanical exoskeleton!"

"Hooray! Let's hijack this gentleman!"

"Quite! My goodness, his mind is full of hacker software that will overthrow the entire political system of Elysium!"

"Again, sir, I say how convenient!"

"Indeed!

So easy we should've done it two hundred years ago!

As the guy sitting next to me put it "Well, that's all very convenient isn't it?" It was just kind of like they worked a little too hard to find a happy ending. And each progressive event just felt a little too good to be true.

Thematically it's a very interesting commentary on our world and the United States. Earth citizens are so desperate for healthcare that they pay a fortune for the chance to fly to Elysium and break into the homes of the wealthy to use their health machines. Also an interesting commentary on immigration as the Earth citizens we see all speak a mixture of Spanish and English while the Elysian elite speak a mixture of clipped English and French. Their philosophy of keeping people out (blowing them out of the sky) is met with little controversy and, at best, a slap on the wrist. What does that say about us as a country? Makes you think about the different methods people talk about to "keep people out of our country brawrawrarwaarr."

Bet that healthcare you got is pretty convenient... :X

Anyway, cinematically political agendas aside, it could have been really really cool. It made an excellent social commentary on the United States (Are we Elysium? Or are they making statements about big business in the US?) but too convoluted to be good.

5 outa 10. Sorry, Matt Damon.

Also it bothers me that in the trailer they make it seem like his hydraulics are what make him special. That has nothing to do with how they're going to overthrow Elysium. Just sayin.

IN A WORLD...(Where Lake Bell Creates Movies)

Running behind a little this week, guys. But last week I had the privelege of getting a sneak peek of Lake Bell's new movie, In a World..., which she wrote, directed, and starred in herself. Also (if my Twitter strategy is working) y'all should know that she also made a personal appearance with a Q & A after the film as well.

This is how she got to the theater...it's not a shot from the movie..probably...

So the plot of the movie surrounds Carol, a voice coach with a less-than-impressive resume and the daughter of the go-to guy in movie trailer voiceovers. After she gets kicked out of her father's house, she gets the opportunity to promote her own voiceover work and takes off--totally unexpectedly. When the opportunity comes up to voice over the high-profile trilogy of a popular book series (much like The Hunger Games), both Carol and her father chomp at the bit to prove to themselves (and each other) that they are relevant to the extremely competitive industry. Running along side this main plot line are three love stories: Carol's sister hits a snag in her marriage; the ethics of her father dating a woman her own age; and her escapades with two men in the industry.

Wait a second...everyone's mismatched...

So the cool thing about this movie is its subject matter. It doesn't get much more obscure than the land of voiceover. It's only briefly touched on in The Holiday and I really can't think of any other movie where I've even heard it mentioned. When I asked Lake Bell during the Q & A after the movie as to why she picked this as the main subject matter, she basically said that it was just that that has inspired her. Being someone who had briefly tried her hand at the voiceover gig, she knew how competitive the industry was. Not only that but she was inspired because she had never heard a voiceover done by a woman. With the neo-feminism that's taking the nation by storm right now (more into seizing femininity than burning bras), I thought that it was a really cool idea. They even tie in a feminist message at the end, telling girls to take themselves seriously and not to neglect something as impressionable as their voices. In a world (see what I did there?) where girls talk like Kim Kardashian (Omg, kill me. She reminds me of a drunk squirrel), she puts a spotlight on the importance of intelligent speech. A big fat THANK YOU, LAKE BELL from all of my fellow grammar nazis out there.

Omg this picture.

The only things I wasn't crazy about in this movie were the sort of understated humor. While it's subtle and cute and funny, it becomes borderline unexciting. There are chuckles, sure, and plenty of awkward moments with Carol. But it got me wondering at a few points whether this movie was going to take a turn for the worse. Maybe that was its intention? Additionally, the side stories are a little distracting. When Carol's sister's marriage takes a dramatic turn, they create a huge problem and then fix it. Same with the marriage between her father and his thirty-year-old girlfriend. She has a really sweet scene at the end and yet it goes unacknowledged by the two sisters.

I noticed it, girl. I noticed.

It was not bad, it was a pleasure speaking with Lake Bell herself, and I'm anxious to see what other kinds of things she comes up with. However, I would probably put this movie on while doing something else. Like playing Candy Crush. It has a lot of "OOOHHH!!" moments, but in the way that a gossipy magazine does.

6 and a half outa 10. Not bad for your first movie, Ms. Bell!

Despicable Me 2: Kristen Wiig is Taking Over the World...And That's Okay.

Felt like I was in high school again this past Friday when I went out to see Despicable Me 2 with my boyfriend and his little brother (just to clarify, his "little" brother is a 6'2 sophomore in high school, and yes, we are all nerds).

If the one in the middle was a girl...then this would look like us...

Plot: Gru, now a single dad, spends his days looking after his little ones and (unsuccessfully) trying recipes for various jams and jellies that he hopes to sell.  When he is suddenly kidnapped by a woman who ends up working for the Anti-Villain Agency (or something), he is then recruited to reach back into his darker days and try to help them find a villain that has been tampering with a top-secret serum that turns cute things into monsters. Bonding with the woman, named Lucy (Wiig), he finds that maybe his feelings for her are a little more than professional. And of course, bringing up the rear are hilarious characters such as El Macho (who was rumored to be the most manly man in the world, dying as a result of being tied to a shark strapped with bombs that landed in an erupting volcano, hahaha), Dr. Nefario, and the three little girls (with a special emphasis on Agnes; omg so cute).

Could he finally have met his match?

Hmm, what to say. Did I like the movie? Yes. Was it funny? Yes. Was it hilarious even? Yes. But was it as memorable as the first one? Impossible.

Unfortunately for kids' movies, I think that sequels' screenplays and plots tend to revolve around events and not necessarily character development. What makes the original Despicable Me so hilarious is the fact that Gru is so grumpy and hateful in the first half and then finds his mushy side when he decides to adopt the three girls. This is missing in the newest edition. Gru, instead of being his regular hateful self like in the last one, is made to find compromise between being a grump and the kind-hearted man that he discovers within himself in the first film. Therefore there isn't much to expand upon character-wise besides highlighting his romantic side (which has always been decidedly awkward). Who better to match his awkward turtley-ness than the Queen of Awkward, Her Majesty, Kristen Wiig.

This girl.

Wiig definitely brings the humor in her first heavy role in a kid's movie. However, her flighty/spazzy sort of humor doesn't really add much depth to her character either and we're sort of left with a cartoon romance. Which, I guess isn't a big deal since it's a kid movie and all, but it doesn't make the film particularly memorable. I would've liked to see them stir up some conflict with Gru going back to his evil ways or something a little more interesting.

Would've liked to see a little more of Evil Gru though...

However, the minions (as always) really beefed up the chuckles and I was laughing the whole time regardless.

Not bad, Dreamworks. Solid 7 outa 10.

The Heat: See? Girls Can Be Funny Cops Too!

Two posts in two days? I know what you're thinking...

But I'm not gonna. Cuz I ALSO saw ANOTHER movie last week and didn't have the opportunity to write about it. It was a sneak peak from Philly Film Society so I want to take advantage of the fact that ya'll probably haven't seen it.

What movie, you ask?

See above.

Riding the tails of the crazy success that Bridesmaids was, this movie takes a crack at the buddy cop genre with the first buddy cop film to feature two female leads (feminism. hell yeah.).

Our plot follows two lady cops who couldn't be any more different (I know, who's ever heard of a movie with characters like those before??!). One, Sarah Ashburn (Bullock) is a special agent in the FBI who never misses the tiny details and has a reputation for being by-the-book, narcissistic, and a pain in the ass. Opposite her, in the dregs of Boston, we have Officer Shannon Mullins, a hellcat with no tolerance for opposition to the law or anything else that she finds annoying. Thrown together by several circumstances, they end up working together on a case to uncover a covert crime syndicate that has been taking over Boston's drug scene. Together, I've gotta admit...they make one hell of a hilarious team.

Boom baby.

This movie seems to be following predecessors that include The Other Guys  and 21 Jump Street and I really have to hand it to them: they've really found a hilarious formula here.  Mixing the absurd (Mullins at one point pantomimes going through her police chief's office looking for his "teeny tiny" balls) with a liiiiittle bit of compassion (scenes including Mullins's brother who was formerly in a drug ring, and Ashburn's total cluelessness when it comes to being not-weird), this movie was nothing if not 100% entertaining.

I think this picture says it all.

The true star here is Melissa McCarthy. Her ad-libbing skills are unmatchable. The character that everyone found so funny in Bridesmaids is exacerbated in this, made more badass and totally ruthless. With all of her insults she is so incredibly sharp that it's hard to take your eyes off of her comedic genius. Bullock is her usually quirky funny self, a mixture of Miss Congeniality's Gracie Hart and Two Weeks Notice's awkward turtle, Lucy Kelson. Incredibly, she still manages to hold her own, but as more of a sidekick to McCarthy's brash character.

Please go see this movie. Omg. It was so funny. Never has there been more loling.

9 outa 10. Pure entertainment.

Just watch the trailer even. I promise, it's hilarious.

The Purge (Bleeehh)

Haha, okay, cheesy joke, but we were making it throughout the previews and all day today so now it's become associative. Yes, I saw the latest futuristic dystopian doodad in theaters and here's what I have to say:

hmmm

As an avid reader of graphic novels and comics (shut up.) I gotta say I wish that they had simply made a graphic novel, comic series, or even TV series about this idea. It has so much potential and I feel like it got marketed wrong and just kind of...missed the mark. And when it could've been really interesting too!

For those of you that haven't seen the trailers, the film is about The United States, recently "reborn" by some new founding fathers. In this new "utopia" (-cough-DYSTOPIA-cough-), unemployment is at an all-time low, along with murder and other crime. The reason? The Annual Purge. The Annual Purge is a day that allows people to release aggression and animosity by murdering people, looting, and participating in all kinds of crime while the government turns a blind eye for a full twelve hours. Great idea right? Just like communism!

It could totally work! Y'know, as long as you totally ignore

human nature and morals and rights...it's a GREAT idea!

SO in the backdrop of this day in 2022, the day of the annual Purge, we have a family of four in the upper-class suburbs. The Sandins are a regular ole family, the dad sells security systems, the mom is a housewife (I think...), the daughter is an overachiever with boyfriend problems, and the son is a sensitive gizmo-freak. Normal, perfectly normal. And in the normality of every year beforehand, they shut themselves into their own home and lock down for twelve hours while the purge happens outside.

I'm about 30% sure you can't get in here...

That is, until they let a fugitive into their home and all hell breaks loose. During a commotion that occurs when the man is let inside, the family breaks apart (in more ways than one) and is set into a sequence of events that could damage the family forever. Visited by some psychotic twenty-somethings after the man inside (for apparently no other reason than the fact that he is homeless) they are given the opportunity to turn the man over. But after they lose their window they are invaded by this group of weirdos and must defend themselves alone. Interesting plot twists keep you on your toes, even until the end.

So, let's get down to brass tacks: did I like the movie?

What I liked about this film is the fact that they thought up this idea at all. How often in politics are people convinced that something is GENIUS when, in practice, it ruins most of the beauty of humanity (again, communism: great on paper, horrible in practice)? The "new founding fathers"have introduced a principle that everyone has thought of at least once in their lives, even fleetingly, and gives them the chance to carry it out without repercussions. The people in the film seem to use this principle as a right, making it all the more horrifying. Neighbors openly sharpen machetes, security cameras pick up friends in camo with machine guns "going out hunting" and yet nothing is to be done about it. Because it is legal, people don't seem to put up a fight against the moral fabric of killing someone. The rich, especially are highlighted in this movie as taking the opportunity that the Purge offers to clear riffraff off the street, such as the homeless, the poor, and people that would be the most defenseless when push came to shove.

Like this homeless guy

The movie therefore gives an interesting perspective (from the rich) when they are faced with the possibility of saving a man on the basis of the fact that he's human, and not on his economical status. In that sense, the movie is a great commentary on classism and government.

What I DIDN'T like about this film is the limited way that they play with this crazy idea. For a theory this big, you could've brought in SO many different elements. I would've loved to see a multiple-storyline film with one person in the ghettos, one cop, one rich family (such as the Sandins), and one other grab-bag character. That would've been CRAAYYY. Or even a storyline that goes outside the house. One of the things that makes the plot so crazy is the fact that you have no one to call for help except your neighbors. And yet, limiting a family to a house with no way out is something that you see in horror films ALL THE TIME. When a Stranger Calls, Panic Room, Cabin in the Woods, Evil Dead (-shudder-). Literally, ALL. KINDS. of movies use broken phone lines, absent cell signals, and downed power to make it seem like there's no way out. So I feel like it could've been a little scarier if they had gone outside the house.

We have no power, so we can't call the cops---oh wait, irrelevant...

The other thing that seemed to piss off a certain someone that I saw the movie with was the fact that it was not scary. This movie has been marketed as though it's a ripoff of The Strangers, or other scary serial-killer movies that have people sporting masks in them. These kids, however, are amateurs. And for all their creepy swinging in swings, they are no match for a double-barreled shotgun.

Seriously, if you block off their masks, it's just a bunch of yuppies

doing some night time house repairs.

I had a lot of feelings about this movie, but my top feeling is frustration that they didn't do more with this idea. I think it still would make an excellent comic series, but as a two-hour movie it somehow doesn't go into the depth needed for such a controversial topic.

Eh, 6 outa 10.

Oz: The Kind-of-Great and Not-Very Powerful

So since it is night time and I have made the fatal mistake of treating my caffeine-sensitive body to a cappuccino*, I'm going to burn some of this energy off by indulging you all with the fascinating review of my most recent cinematic adventure seeing Oz: The Great and Powerful.

Let me preface this review with the fact that unlike most other cinephiles, I have never been particularly attracted to The Wizard of Oz. Great movie? Sure. Do I see anything markably awesome about it? Ehhhh...not really. 1939 was a magical year for cinema and had I been around at the time to hear the Oscars on the radio I'm almost certain that I would have voted for Gone With the Wind over The Wizard of Oz. That being said (and hopefully I haven't lost half of my followers by admitting this outright), I'm going to proceed with how my lukewarm opinions about the original film affected my thoughts about the prequel.

The story begins with a fair in 1905. Oscar, Oz for short (played by James Franco), is a magician and has developed a career based on illusion. Tricking his audience is how he makes his living and isn't bad at using it to pick up chicks either. Actually, this is what seems to get him into trouble. After getting chased by someone who appears to be a strong man, Oz escapes by jumping into a hot air balloon and (he is apparently not the brightest) cutting the tether right in the middle of a tornado. Oops!

"Hmm...really did not think that one through..."

After fainting (or floating into the clouds...I forget what the transition was there...), Oz finds himself in a land called by his own name. He is met immediately by the beautiful and timid Theodora, who is amazed and joyous at finding the prophetic "wizard." Seeing an opportunity to whisk a young lady off her feet, Oz plays along with the notion that he is indeed the wizard of Oz (see what I did there?). Wooing her with the same tired tricks that he won ladies back home with, Oz unintentionally tricks the young Theodora into falling in love with him. After reaching The Emerald City and meeting Theodora's suspicious-looking sister, he is armed with the task of proving himself as wizard by destroying The Wicked Witch (who ends up being Glinda, the good witch). Of course, after figuring out who is the real wicked witch, he decides to side with Glinda. Forgetting about the naive Theodora, he teams up with Glinda to lead her people into battle, a decision which sets into motion a string of events that lead up to the original film, The Wizard of Oz.

So...the exposition is a little complex in this movie and I don't want to give too much away. Suffice it to say that those of you who thought that this film would be based more along the lines of the infamous musical Wicked are going to be in for a little disorientation.

Warning: the following contains semi-spoilers depending on how much you want to know. Scroll down until the green lettering if you want to skip this bit and get on with my full review.

The movie is based on the first book in the original book series by L. Frank Baum and is actually kind of sad. Instead of Elfeba (or however the hell you spell that name), who (if memory serves me) is markedly green throughout her entire life, Theodora takes on the appearance after being jilted by Jackass McGee Oz. Losing faith that he is the real wizard and looking for an escape from her pain, she enlists her sister, Evanora, to help her. Evanora, of course, is the real Wicked Witch and makes the horrible mistake of underestimating Theodora's dark side. What ends up happening is that Theodora, once hopeful and searching for peace, is turned into a green, hook-nosed monstrosity of downright rage. Kind of a sad metaphor for anyone who has ever been seriously let down.

Fortunately, most people do not have to deal with

the physically green result of having a horrible soul.

OKAY, GUYS IT'S SAFE TO KEEP READING BELOW

Unfortunately, at least from my own view, this movie is left to deal with the Oz-fanatics of the pre-special-effects, pre-complex-movie era and it sort of limits how far they can go with certain things. The notorious Witch of the West character, for example, had to be kept green with a hooked nose and pointy chin. This kind of makes sense at the end, but I feel like in our day and age, someone deceivingly beautiful is far more terrifying (and easier to look at) than the almost comical frump that ends up on screen. And it's not like they don't try to sexy her up a little. Instead of the loose, shapeless black dress, she wears leather leggings and a corset top. However, that trademark cackle doesn't really seem to fit this Wicked Witch, and thus her character seems a little...off.

Right? She just seems stuck between sexy and hideous 

and it makes me very confused.

All in all, I kind of had the same problems with everything else. The movie, which could've done some amazing things with the original book, is kind of limited in trying to mollify the original Wizard of Oz movie fans. Laden with references to the original film (the flying monkey almost gets eaten by a lion, they use a bunch of scarecrows at one point, Oz's high school sweetheart is named Emmie, etc.), the movie seems unsure of how to proceed without making use of its cult following. The result seems to be that they don't create anything incredibly creative (which is a serious bummer considering how much you could play with the literary world of Oz). It kind of ends up being a little obsolete, with overly simplified characters and a plot that seems to drag a little.

The one thing that I did enjoy about the movie was how much they play with special effects. Much like Avatar and movies since that have dealt with vibrant other-worlds, it's a dazzling world of color and it's mesmerizing that way. The coolest thing that I saw was the character of the China Doll, who is created flawlessly.

Cray.

All in all, was Oz a bad movie? No. Was I terribly impressed? Eh, not really. This may, however, be due to my ambivalence at the first movie though, as my boyfriend's mom is a die-hard Wizard of Oz fan and she seemed pretty pleased with having more of her favorite story being put in front of her.

All said and done, I'd give it a 6 outa 10.





*WARNGNI: This post may include some caffeine-induced, jittery-fingered typos. Enjyo!

Warm Bodies: HorRomCom?

Got a sneak peak of the latest genre hybrid out there: Warm Bodies. I was actually pretty interested to see how this HorRomCom (horror/romantic comedy, copyright Nick Grajewski) sized up to some of the other ones of its kind.

For those of you who haven't seen the preview, this movie is about a guy named R (Nicholas Hoult), a guy in his early 20s (presumably) who is having trouble connecting with people. No wonder, seeing as how R is a zombie. But he's special. R seems to have a mental capacity that excedes those around him. Instead of roaming around without any thoughts of his own, we (the audience) get to hear his inner monologue and thus discover the depths of his personality. His whole life (life?) changes, though, when he bumps into his true love while he is eating her boyfriend's brains (awkward).

Just go with it...

Taking her back to his home at the airport, R bonds with Julie (Teresa Palmer). She begins to see (and he begins to experience) that the zombies are capable of changing back into humans once they remember how to love. R and Julie's now-romance becomes a race against time as they strive to unite humans and zombies against the "bonies" who have sworn a vendetta against them all.

No thank you. Please get off.

Hmmm, so at first glance, it's not bad. I'm gonna talk about the things that I like about this movie. First of all, I loved the soundtrack. It very gracefully unites classic pop and old rock with the latest electro-pop, grouping together the nostalgia that R has for the past and the promises for the future. I also really liked that they add humor into the plot, despite the intense themes. R's friend Marcus (Rob Corddry) carries about half of the humor of the whole movie and he's hilarious. Also, the plot has you rooting for R and Julie to get through everything that they have to get through and really tries to portray that whole "love against all odds" thing.

Are you Team R?

And now, les problems.

The main issue that I had with this film is the chemistry between R and Julie. I totally get him falling head over heels for her (she's beautiful and seems pretty cool), but I didn't so much get that vibe from her. She is constantly running away from him, which probably is trying to elude to her vivacity but really just makes you kind of think she's a little put off by him. Also he comes across as this soulful kind of dreamer and, while she never seems like a ditz, I just couldn't really see them together. She exudes this sort of popular girl vibe and he seems more like the class poet (when will Hollywood stop putting these two types of people together?). That kind of stood in the way of me being 100% in favor of their supposed "written in the stars" romance.

Ok, seriously? We know you have boobs, come on...

I think part of the movie's problem is that it tries to do too much and satisfy too many people. Had this not been a Hollywood production I think it would've done much better. I could've seen Julie as a more artsy lost type and then she and R would've had a little bit more in common. As opposed to Julie the poor little rich girl who has been tolerating this zombie who took her hostage and then doesn't see anyone else around so she falls in love with him. With a more artsy character for Julie, the movie would've read more like Wristcutters: A Love Story and other bleak films that carry a central theme of love as hope. As is, though, I just didn't fall for it.

As an aside, Nick and a few other of the theater patrons also seemed to be annoyed at the low-budget CGI "bonies". I didn't really mind it that much since I think if they were overly scary it woud've put the movie more in the horror category, but if you're a sucker for graphics, that might getcha down.

6 out 10.