FILM REVIEW: Mad Max: Fury Road

 It's been 30 years since the character of Max Rockatansky, played by Aussie Mel Gibson, graced the big screen in Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome (1985). And good things never die, because the writer and director of the original Mad Max trilogy, George Miller, decided to revive his well-received series with a shot of adrenaline he calls Fury Road. Only this time around the rugged anti-hero, Max, is played by the very talented brit, Tom Hardy (Child 44). There was a lot of speculation as to how Hardy would carry the role because to a lot of people, it's Mel Gibson's role. (Much like the case of Robert Englund as Freddy Krueger.) But as it turned out, Hardy's acting ability combined with Miller's strict direction and attention to detail kept the integrity of Max on course and intact. What's even cooler is that Hugh Keays-Byrne, the guy who played Toecutter in the original Mad Max (1979), returns to the series as the antagonist again. This time, he plays a sickly Warlord named Immortan Joe, a cold villain who starts a war over his own ego. Oscar Winner Charlize Theron (Monster) shares the big screen with Tom Hardy, as Imperator Furiosa: a woman bound on revenge and freedom from under Immortan Joe's dictatorship.

FILM REVIEW: The Expendables 3 (2014)

I'm pretty sure everyone my age is still caught up in the new TMNT flick and Guardians of the Galaxy, because my fiance and I sat in the back row of an empty theater Saturday, the only other people in the whole showing were five or six people who were all geriatric. I would be lying if I said that I expected much from this installment in the Expendables series, but I'm at the very least pleased that it's better then the dreadful 2012 sequel. You have to understand who these films are aimed at in order to truly appreciate them. If you still have a knack for 80's cheesy action motion pictures (the way that I do with 80's horror) with a cliche plot full of no story and tends to be overly loud, then the good news is that you'll more than likely "dig" this. So when watching, try to put on your 'I have to remember to forgive all these flaws I'm about to see because it's a senseless action flick' glasses (that they don't give you with your ticket purchase), so you can take it in properly. Unfortunately, I left my glasses at home...

EDGE OF TOMORROW resets the end game

MILD SPOILERS THROUGHOUT 

RATED- PG-13

RUN TIME- 113 Mins

WRITER(S)- Christopher, McQuarrie, Jez Butterworth, and John-Henry Butterworth

STARRING- Tom Cruise, Emily Blunt, and Bill Paxton

DIRECTOR(S)- Doug Liman 

Synopsis taken from IMDb

An officer finds himself caught in a time loop in a war with an alien race. His kills increase as he faces the same brutal combat scenarios, and his union with a Special Forces warrior gets him closer and closer to defeating the enemy.  

Tom Cruise (Mission: Impossible) is an unlikely hero in this sci-fi action thriller. Honestly, I tend to avoid watching Cruise's films for the most part, but this and the Mission:Impossible movies are exceptions. Even though I'm not a fan of Cruise, I can't deny he's in some good features. Edge of Tomorrow picks up informing us of a war that's been waging for five years now against an alien race called Mimics. And we see the human's fighting gear, which like the world, is upgraded and very futuristic, unlike anything you'll see soldiers wearing right now. The gear looks like a combination of the uniforms worn by the Marines in Aliens (1986), with some Elysium (2013), and Iron Man (2008) mixed in.

DAYS OF FUTURE PAST keeps hope alive for mutants and fans alike

MILD SPOILERS THROUGHOUT 

RATED- PG-13
RUN TIME- 131 Mins
WRITER(S)- Simon Kinberg, Jane Goldman, and Mathew Vaughn 
STARRING- Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellen, and Hugh Jackman
DIRECTOR- Bryan Singer



Synopsis taken from IMDb
The X-Men send Wolverine to the past in a desperate effort to change history and prevent an event that results in doom for both humans and mutants.




The "X-Men" films were always second to me, right after The Dark Knight trilogy. In fact, I really thought that "X-Men: First Class" was better than "The Avengers". While I'm not a fan of the Wolverine solo movies, I've liked all of the other "X-Men" films, even the third one. It's kinda sorta a tie for me between "First Class" and "X2" as the best installments, but there for a while, the series hit a rocky road for fans who had plenty to complain about. With the unsteadiness of a lot of people not liking the third movie, and then to be followed by an even less liked solo Wolverine movie, moviegoers and comic fans alike began to believe that the series had peaked. Then "First Class" landed, and it changed things up. It rebooted the franchise in a way, by introducing a new cast of old characters, and telling the origins of Erik Lehnsherr and Charles Xavier.

MAN OF STEEL from the perspective of a non-Superman fan

RATED- PG-13
RUN TIME- 143 Mins
WRITER(S)- David S. Goyer and Christopher Nolan
STARRING- Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, and Michael Shannon
DIRECTOR- Zack Snyder



Synopsis taken from IMDb
A young itinerant worker is forced to confront his secret extrastellar origin when Earth is invaded by members of his own race.




Having never been a very big Superman fan growing up, it's easy to say that when I heard there was going to be a new film, that I wasn't impressed. Zack Snyder is a hit-or-miss director as far as I'm concerned. Some of his movies are great like "300", and others tend to disappoint, such as "Sucker Punch". So, I knew that just his name on the project wouldn't pull me in and make me eager to see it.

 However, things slowly changed when I found out that Christopher Nolan was involved, and writing the story. I knew then, that there was going to be some merit, so I started to look into it. Then I saw the trailers for the film, and my opinion towards the movie was officially changed.

Now, as far as I can tell, those who dislike this motion picture are all really big Superman fans. I can see that a lot was changed about the character and the story, and apparently that got all the Super-fans' panties all up in a bunch. Truth is, I loved the movie. And if anything, it's made me become somewhat of a fan of Superman. Again, I wasn't a fan growing up, so all the changes made for this film didn't bother me in the least bit.

I enjoyed it from beginning to end. Most of the people I know who've seen it liked it a lot, but they're none fans of Superman. Infact, despite how they aren't fans of the character, they all seemed to say that the film is "amazing". But, those who are fans of the character and read the comics, seem to have a bad taste left in their mouth after watching it. I can understand, but in my personal opinion, it's just logic that they'd update the character and story to make it realistic in today's time. And now more than ever we have the technical ability and technology to go far with this character and do something that couldn't be achieved until now.

The back story they give Clark (Henry Cavill) both as a young boy and adult is what I think I liked the most about the film. It seems that for once, someone finally thought out the realistic side of things, and asked the question of what if Superman were real? How would things change, and how would he survive? This is a much better approach than having everyone welcome him into open arms with big ol' smiles on their faces. And for once, the fact that he's an alien actually takes a part in the story!

Russell Crowe does a really good job at playing Jor-El, Superman's father. I'm glad to see that his appearance in the film isn't short lived like I had expected. However, doing films like this, it's easy to see that Crowe isn't the actor he once was. But doing "Man of Steel" is the least of his worries, and is the best film that I've seen Crowe in in a while. Besides, Christopher Nolan has the ability to bring an all-star cast to his films, and it's what makes them better. His movies don't win MTV's best kiss awards, they win Oscars and other prestigious awards.

I also really like the flashbacks of Clark with his mother (Diane Lane) and father (Kevin Costner). It goes in-depth on how raising an alien child takes it's toll, and how even Clark can be a total prick when going through puberty (laugh). But I find the parts with his parents to be the heart of the film, and Costner and Lane do amazing jobs at playing the down to earth farmers.

One thing that always bothered me about the character of Superman was that no one ever seemed to care that he was an alien, and that he answered the question of are we alone in the universe. Well, this movie touches up on all these basics that everyone else seemed to disregard in past films. For once there's consequences for Clark to be Superman!

The overall story and the reactions from the people in the story is extremely well done and about as realistic as possible. After watching this flick, it's hard to imagine that if Superman were in fact real, that he'd be any different from this. The character and overall premise is a lot more grounded, yet has a huge scope.

Lois Lane, Clarks love interest, is played perfectly by the lovely Amy Adams. Adams has made quite a name for herself lately that would leave anyone impressed. She's done "American Hustle" and "The Fighter". She's getting to the point now in her career where she's being added to all-star casts for award winning movies. That's never a bad thing. And she does a great job at portraying a new take on Lois Lane, and makes for great on-screen chemistry with Henry Cavill. I like their relationship, and I usually hate the love stories in comic book films. This one however, wasn't overbearing and a total cheesefest.

The lead villain, Genral Zod (Michael Shannon) does a good job at keeping the suspense up and lingering. And he actually has character growth, which is a really nice touch. Because although you still side against him, there's some sympathy there that allows you to not just dismiss him as another super villain, but actually care somewhat for his character.

But I find that "Man of Steel" doesn't really become a comic book movie until Zod shows up towards the middle of the film. Up until that point, it's all very sincere and real. Then the fight scenes and battles remind you that it's a fantasy movie, and not just a movie about an alien learning to live among humans. While I enjoy the action scenes, it seems to take away from the story. But, if it didn't have long and drawn out fight scenes, it wouldn't be a comic book movie.

I do enjoy the fights, it just takes you out of how grounded it all was prior and reminds you that this isn't, nor could it ever be realistic. I like how although totally unbelievable, the action scenes are well developed, and are unlike anything you've seen before. Hell, a lot of the fight takes place in the air! It's easy to see  that now they're able to make Superman have fights that are true to who he is and what he can do. Even if an abundance of cgi is needed to pull it off...

Despite what critics and comic fans alike think, I liked the movies ending. I like that he killed Zod. I understand that that's not common behavior for Superman, but if you think about it he didn't have much of a choice. It's not like he kills Zod and it means nothing, he knows it's a big deal and it tears him apart to do it as you see his breakdown after. With everything done up with such realism, and the circumstances in which the film takes place, and taking into consideration that it's a completely modified story to fit in with today's times, and I think the ending was very fitting. It puts the new face on the character that the filmmakers wanted, and that's what's important.

Remember, this is a whole new Superman. This is the film that shows you how Clark becomes the Superman everyone knows him to be. And I'm happy with this origin story. I find it very impressive. If it can make this non-Superman fan into a fan, then they did their job as far as I'm concerned.

3 1/2 out of 5 stars

GRAVITY (2013)

RATED- PG-13
RUN TIME- 91 MINS
WRITER(S)- Alfonso Cuaron and Jonas Cuaron 
STARRING- Sandra Bullock, George Clooney, and Ed Harris
DIRECTOR- Alfonso Cuaron 



Synopsis taken from IMDb
A medical engineer and an astronaut work together to survive after a catastrophe destroys their shuttle and leaves them adrift in orbit.




Talk about a movie that's been getting a lot of hype! It seems everywhere you go it's 'Gravity' this and 'Gravity' that. Whenever there's a movie going around like this there's two kinds of crowds: those who get the hype and agree with it, and those who don't get it and say it's overrated. Usually I find myself in the latter crowd. Usually films that get critical praise give me migraines because they're so dull and boring. I was hoping that was not the case with this film.

I knew that I'd eventually get around to seeing it, but I didn't really feel a rush. It was my fiance who made me feel the rush and urgency to see it. So, being the awesome fiance that I am, I brought it home as a surprise gift for her (on Blu-Ray of course). We pretty much popped it in the player before the blu-ray case was even opened (laugh). And I was actually really satisfied with the outcome, and I can say now that I do agree with the hype it's getting. It's just that good!

Although George Clooney has a minimal part, he makes his presence felt. And Sandra Bullock does a great job of supporting the film by herself. Though I would never have considered her for a best actress in this role because of all the cgi used, she does an amazing job! Very sincere character that clicks with the audience. She's scared and out of her element, same as everyone else who isn't experienced in her situation. For 90 minutes we watch her fight tooth and nail, with everything she's got, to survive being alone in space and make it back home in one piece.

What I didn't expect about this film was how non-stop it is. I had gone in expecting to watch Sandra float around in space for God knows how long, and what I got is a blistering outburst of chaos and special effects that are top-notch. The tension only eases up momentarily until a new problem arises. I said to my friend, "it's like the worst day you could possibly have, only it's happening in space" and that's the best way I can sum it up. I didn't expect it to be one disaster after another, but damn if it didn't keep me on my toes!

Towards the end of the film we get some heart to heart time with Bullock's character, Ryan Stone, who's still tormented by the death of her young daughter. She's wasted a lot of time in her life as of late due to being caught up in past agonies. And now that she has nothing and no one, she has a chance to either make a new life for herself and start anew, or die trying. Her performance at the end is gut wrenching, and had me hoping for the best for her, but i was uncertain it would play out that way.

I was also surprised by how short the movie is! Here I am expecting an over two hour long movie, and it's only 91 mins! That just goes to show you how much momentum the film has, because a lot happens in a short amount of time. It's an avalanche of disaster, and you're a witness to it. I love it!

After watching the bonus features, I came to understand how exactly it isn't a completely accurate film. And how some things had to be altered in order to make it work for the movie. Such things do lessen a movie for me because if you're not based in reality then your based in fantasy. And if you're based in fantasy you're not believable. This film attempts to blend the lines in order to allow cop-outs, such as having suits with made up zippers for easy removal.

And there's other small things, like the fact that the director Alfonso Cuaron threw in a quick shot in George Clooney's helmet reflection of the camera crew. Such little jokes go wasted on me. This film would have been better off staying as close to reality as possible, instead of looking for easy shortcuts and funny little inside jokes being riddled within.

So ultimately I absolutely loved the movie, but that doesn't take away from my disappointment towards some of the nonsense in it. It has a good leading actress who knows how to carry a film, and it's got a good story. Debris in space is no joke, and this film is an attempt to make more people aware of how polluted our solar system is becoming. I like the message, and I like the movie.

THOR: THE DARK WORLD (2013)

RATED- PG-13
RUN TIME- 112 Mins
WRITER(S)- Christopher Yost, Christopher Markus, and Stephen McFeely
STARRING- Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, and Tom Hiddleston 
DIRECTOR- Alan Taylor 



Synopsis taken from IMDb
When Jane Foster is possessed by a great power, Thor must protect her from a new threat of old times: The Dark Elves.




Right before the first "Thor" film landed in 2011, I ran to my local comic shop and grabbed a stack of Thor comics. 13 to be exact. I've never read about Thor, nor had any interest in doing so, but I wanted to do my homework and get ready for the film. Although I wasn't impressed with the comics, the film was entertaining for me, and I liked it more than some of Marvel's other productions. So yeah, the movie kinda made me a fan of the character, but I'm by no means claiming to be enthralled by it.

This time around, the hammer toting God (Chris Hemsworth), is back in a fierce and gritty sequel that takes things to a whole new height of epic proportions. This maintained a childish tone so kids can like it, but it's really dark and not what most people expected. I really like that this didn't get off track by trying to appeal to children. This is a film that keeps it's balls while staying likable to younger crowds.

Despite all the cgi and the unnecessary one-liners, this actually turned out to be a damn good sequel. And Loki (Tom Hiddleston) was actually my favorite part! For such an unlikable scumbag, I'm getting used to his antics and starting to see some appeal in the character. I also think that this time around, some effort was really spent on making you see a new side of him that makes him likable.

Once Thor's love interest, Jane (Natalie Portman) becomes possessed by the Aether, a weapon that is used by the dark elves to destroy the universe, things become complicated. Trying to find answers as well as save the woman he loves, Thor must call on his deceptive little brother to help him. Seeing Thor and Loki work together really makes you wish they weren't enemies, because they're a damn good team.

Asgard, home of Thor and his father Odin, is attacked savagely by the Dark Elves, and they make their point loud and clear, sending a message to all of Asgard. We get a little peak of what's to come as there's some scattered action battles, but nothing like the ending in which things get real thrilling. As a matter of fact the very end, right before the credits is probably my favorite scene in the movie. I expected it, but I didn't. Hard to explain, but I'm glad it ended like it did.

One thing that I find disappointing about comic films is that certain people are safe. There's always a looming danger, yet everyone always makes it out alive and kicking. Just like how in kids movies there's always a death that lasts about two and a half seconds before it's revealed that by some magical way they've survived and aren't going to die. I find that to be a  real bummer about films like this, and it's what is truly stopping them from reaching their potential greatness. And when someone is killed it's small characters that aren't really needed anyway. They're just kept around for comedic entertainment and have outlived their purpose for the story.

And I'm over the love story part of all these types of movies. I understand having love interests, but it's just too much! It seems every superhero has their head half up some girls ass and the other half is trying to save the world. I just wish that every superhero movie didn't have to end with a cheesy hug and kiss. I think that although there's still some creativity left in  comic book movie films, it's still becoming a bit repetitive. And I hope someone can come along and change that, before that light burns out for good.

Somebody needs to think of something new to start doing in these comic movies that makes them not so easy to predict. Ones that do, like The Dark Knight Trilogy, stand out higher above the rest.

"Thor: The Dark World" is a fun and tense ride, but don't expect to much from it. Or instead of being surprised, you'll be left hanging. For what it is, a movie about a God fighting evil elves, it's pretty good. After a second viewing, I think I'd place it above the first film.

3 out of 5 stars

THE WOLVERINE (2013)

RATED- R
RUN TIME- 126 Mins
WRITER(S)- Mark Bomback and Scott Frank
STARRING- Hugh Jackman, Will Yun Lee, and Tao Okamoto
DIRECTOR- James Mangold



Synopsis taken from IMDb
When Wolverine is summoned to Japan by an old acquaintance, he is embroiled in a conflict that forces him to confront his own demons.




I figured that since I've never reviewed an X-Men film before that I should start this review off with a quick summary of my feelings towards the mutant movies. First of all, the character Wolverine is my second favorite comic book character, right after Batman. So, having grown up a fan of comics, it's always a pleasure to see Wolverine on screen. Especially when you have Hugh Jackman knocking the role out of the ballpark every time. However, I've said this to friends before, and I'll say it now: Wolverine is very much like Hannibal Lecter, but not in the way you're assuming.

They're alike because when they're mixed in with a good cast supported by a good story, they shine and are everyone's favorite. They're the character you come out of the movies talking about. However, take the mystery away from the characters by giving them their own films, and it's a different story. It's very much the case of less being more! Without any mystery, very little is left to be desired about the characters. I understand the need to give them their own backstory, because they're such iconic characters but, I'd rather see no back story than a boring and uneventful one.

Much is the case with such films as 2001's "Hannibal", 2007's "Hannibal Rising", and 2009's "X-Men Origins: Wolverine". Now what do all of these films have in common? They suck! Just ask the popular consensus, not that what's popular ever meant a damn to me.

My point is, having Wolverine in a second solo film only sent off my spidey senses, and I totally skipped it in theaters. After the prior films disappointment, I wasn't holding my breath. Hell yes I was excited that the clawed savage was back on the silver screen, and hell no was I happy about it being another solo film. He by himself isn't enough to carry a movie, such was proved by the previous movie. Wolverine is at his best when he's a part of something bigger, like the X-Men.

All of that being said, this flick didn't turn out to be so bad, but it doesn't disprove anything that I've said, and I still stand by that. I'm just not overall impressed. Not to mention that towards the end it became completely predictable! Call me a Batman fanboy, but The Dark Knight Trilogy really ruined things for me. Watching this is like watching a Saturday morning cartoon. No comic book-based movies are the same to me anymore. I see the children's appeal in them, and at 26-years-old, I'm not a child. So the attention and action figures this film got is wasted on me, personally.

Unlike "X-Men Origins: Wolverine", this one actually brought something worthy to the table, and attempted to be creative and not ruin the character. I like the concept of the film, the fact that Logan is tired of living his life as an indestructible mutant, and lives like a hermit. He takes on the hobo look for a short bit, but that is all changed when an old friend of his from Japan wants to offer him the chance to rid himself of his healing ability. The same ability that Logan sees himself as cursed for having. Once he declines the offer, things go from bad to worse...

There's some non-stop action towards the end of the feature. Once Wolverine faces off against Silver Samurai is when I started to lose my interest. Although the fight scenes are pretty to the eye, they really did nothing for me. I think we've seen better fight scenes with Logan in previous films. Nothing particularly stands out to me about this flick. It's nothing memorable.

We've seen better, and we've seen worse. The thing that really killed it for me was the plot twist at the end. Completely uneventful. It just proved how these solo films are mere shells of the "X-Men" films.

I definitely don't hate this movie, and it's better than I expected. But, it's nothing more than cheap thrills to me. When going through the "X-Men" series I'm likely to skip over both Wolverine films. It's something I'd catch on the FX channel when there's nothing else on TV.

On the other hand, I cannot wait until Days of Future Past hits theaters May 23rd. If it's as good as it looks, this could be the best one yet. As it stands now, I think that First Class and X2 are the best in the series. So although "The Wolverine" wasn't very enjoyable for me, I remain positive towards the future of the series.

2.5 out of 5 stars

ELYSIUM (2013)

RATED- R
RUN TIME- 109 Mins
WRITER(S)- Neill Blomkamp
STARRING- Matt Damon, Jodie Foster, and Sharlto Copley
DIRECTOR- Neill Blomkamp



Synopsis taken from IMDb
In the year 2154, the very wealthy live on a man-made space station while the rest of the population resides on a ruined Earth. A man takes on a mission that could bring equality to the polarized worlds.




Having enjoyed "District 9", I was very much looking forward to checking out this film. Neill Blomkamp made quite the name for himself with his first feature, so I figured he'd be someone to follow. Especially since this also tends to be a visual effects movie, the same way District was, I figured this one might be worth a watch.

As it turns out, I watched it twice (laugh). And although I liked it, I still found it disappointing. I think that there was a lot of hype on this film and on Blomkamp, because people now have an expectation of how good his films should be. But, this one just doesn't live up to it's potential.

I think the main reason that this doesn't go over as smoothly as  "District 9" is because it's far too political. You can smell it radiating off of the movie. It's very obvious and in your face, and very blunt. It's just as political and metaphorical as George A. Romero's 2005 zombie film "Land of the Dead", if not worse. Blomkamp has a tendency to incorporate messages through his films, but this just felt unnecessary and not what I was expecting. It's basically a futuristic way of trying to tell the story of people demanding equal respect from their government.

Only it's done with fancy trinkets and lots of special effects and cgi, to help you wash down the overly redundant topic. You can always go watch "V for Vendetta" if you want the same basic principal of story told, and better told while at it.

I think that's what was such a letdown to me. This film had myself and everyone thinking it was going to be epic, and it turned out to have no major performances in it, and ended up just coming off and being treated like an action sci-fi movie. I sound like a snob, but point blank, I expected a better film.

The action scenes, and special effects are well done, and very cutting edge and cool. But again, I wanted more than just fancy fight scenes and a lot of explosions, but I attended the wrong movie. This flick is good for all the wrong reasons. It's good because it's fun, not because it's a well made piece of cinema.

As the story plays out, it becomes a tad predictable. It's like a super breed of a generic movie. It's easy on the eye, and has a sense of intelligence to it. But, there's something missing, a vital piece. It's hard to put my finger on. In the end, I like "Elysium", but it should have been so much better than it is. It's not something I'd watch often.

On the positive side, I think that Matt Damon did a great job playing Max. Damon is very sympathetic and genuine in this role, and he does a good job at making it easy to side with his character. It's not the best acting I've seen from Damon, but it's still pretty good. I believe the character of Max is the common man in today's economy, just trying to make it by, and hope to get treated fairly. Only since this is a movie, he gets to get revenge and bring hell down on those who've earned it.

However, although Matt Damon plays a likable character, he's the only performance that really stands out. Sharlto Copley hardly gets enough screen time to allow us as an audience to really get any character development, so the performance isn't his best work. Add to that, he's a villain, so there's really nothing to like about his character, and there's nothing that stands out and makes his acting or the character memorable. As a matter of fact, I'm willing to bet that the only person people talk about after seeing this film is Matt Damon.

Not to mention, Jody Foster, who really doesn't do much for the film aside from add it's main villain. She does a good job at it, but her acting isn't anything worth mentioning, so I won't. It's easy to play a bad guy and good guy. It's hard to make the character read on screen as more than just  cut and dry, good or bad. There's no layers to her character, Delacourt. So I can't say that I'm impressed with Jody in this one. Let's hope she does something a little more memorable in her next flick, whatever that may be.

At the end of the day, "Elysium" is a fun film for lots of stylized fights and scenery. And if you don't let the thickness of it's political message cloud your air, you just may enjoy it!

3 out of 5 stars

ROBOCOP isn't the same machine

RATED- R
RUN TIME- 117
WRITER(S)- Joshua Zetumer, Edward Neumeier, and Michael Miner
STARRING- Joel Kinnaman, Gary Oldman, and Michael Keaton
DIRECTOR- Jose Padila



Synopsis taken from IMDb
In 2028 Detroit, when Alex Murphy - a loving husband, father and good cop - is critically injured in the line of duty, the multinational conglomerate OmniCorp sees their chance for a part-man, part-robot police officer. 




I'm going to start off this review by stating that unlike most people, I do not hold the original 1987 "Robocop" in high regard. I mean, I like it, but it's no "The Terminator". So, going into viewing this, I wasn't worried about them sullying a film that I hold in high regard. I was however, completely turned off by the black suit. Even I was face-palming at how they made Robocop look like Cobra Commander from the awful "G.I. Joe" films that have came out as of late.

Like most reboots and remakes, there's things I like and dislike about this telling of the tale. I think that they were on the right track with the idea but, about halfway through the film, it seems it was just pieced together however it would fit. And of course, like most movies nowadays, there was little-to-zero character development. I appreciate the fact that they tried to give backstory with Alex Murphy and his family, but it wasn't enough to ever make me really care for the character. I was just looking for cool effects about midway through, when I gave up on the story improving.

In all actual truth, I don't think that there are many things that this movie improved on aside from the design of the suit, and the special effects and cgi. There's more negative to say than positive. Such as, Joel Kinnaman doesn't do as good of a job playing the half-man, half-machine cop as well as Peter Weller once did. However, I think part of that has to do with how the story seemed to rush any emotional scenes, so I blame the writing, not the acting. Had there really been time invested in getting to know the character, I might have said otherwise.

"Robocop" also seems to be a bit dulled down, besides having a cool looking suit (when it's not black). He just didn't come off as much of a bad-ass as he did in the 1987 movie. He isn't as tough or resistant, and his fighting isn't as impressive. He tends to need more help, and is hurt easily. I figured it was because in modernizing the film, they wanted to ground it and make it as realistic as possible. But, it didn't better the film. It took the some fun out of it to be honest.

I really enjoyed seeing Michael Keaton playing a villain. Hell, I've always liked Keaton. But even he couldn't save this film from becoming just another popcorn flick for the kids to watch. See, I don't mind that it's not taken seriously, and I don't mind it being a popcorn flick, but when the original motion picture is a serious Terminator-esque R rated picture, it really pales in comparison.

The movies main twist isn't nearly as impactful, and it's not as political or meaningful as a film overall. The deception angle is weak, and it just came off as too easy and simple. There was no complexity to anything, it is just cut and dry, fun. Nothing more. I find this an unnecessary reboot for such a mediocre story. Should have left "Robocop" series sleeping until something better came along as a worthy reason of awakening it.

So, aside from the fact that I can say "hey, that was a fun movie. Cool effects and some good laughs", there's nothing to praise this movie for. I remained entertained, but that's not nearly enough.

2 out of 5 stars

DEAD IN TOMBSTONE is the western from hell

RATED- UNRATED

RUN TIME- 100 MINS

WRITER(S)- BRENDAN COWLES AND SHANE KUHN

STARRING- DANNY TREJO, MICKEY ROURKE, AND ANTHONY MICHAEL HALL

DIRECTOR- ROEL REINE

Synopsis taken from IMDb

A gang overruns a small mining town murdering their own leader Guerrero (Trejo) in a cold-blooded power grab. Sentenced to eternity in hell he finds himself confronted by Satan himself (Rourke), offering a daring proposition: deliver the six souls of his former gang and he will escape damnation. With time running out, he sets out on a brutal rampage to avenge his own death. 

Starting with high paced action and explosives, and the settings, it's easy to see that this low budget production was done right. Made on just over $5 million, it comes off more like a theatrical release, which impresses me. To me, this motion picture comes off like "The Crow" meets "Tombstone". 

It's a revenge story, but done in a very graphic western portrayal. I don't usually tend to like westerns, but there's good types of flicks from every genre. Those horror buffs who say they "only watch horror" are people I find to be both liars and boring. If you're a cinema buff, you watch it all.

The action is over-the-top, but fitting, and the experience of watching from beginning to end, is nothing short of thrilling. It held my attention and never got dry or disenchanting. I find the story to be somewhat generic, and nothing creative. But, those watching this should know exactly what they're getting in for: a lot of bloody violence, one-liner jokes, and a fun experience.

What's disappointing to me, is that Mickey Rourke seemed to have left his acting ability somewhere else, because it isn't visible on screen. He just walks about and talks trash, antagonizing Danny Trejo, who also wasn't up to par with his performance. There's several times where it seems Trejo was just reading lines off of paper, and it makes his acting suffer. 

However, most surprisingly, Anthony Michael Hall is great in this! I haven't seen something by him that I've liked since "The Dark Knight". So it was exciting to see him not only pull off being completely convincing as the lead villain, but also looking the part!

There's some inconsistencies that this film has, such as, when Guerrero (Trejo) kills off his former gang members one at a time, they never show where their souls go. This left me a bit confused. When Guerrero dies towards the beginning and makes a deal with the devil, he's in hell instantly. However, once several of the gang is murdered at his hands, it shows several shots of Lucifer (Rourke) in hell walking around, but he's not in the company of the villains Guerrero has killed, although he's supposed to be collecting their souls. Makes no sense to me. Perhaps they're in limbo until all 6 souls are collected at once? That could be logical, but is kind of a throwaway theory once you see the end.

It may seem that there's a lot of negative things I have to say, but I actually did enjoy viewing it. And I found it to truthfully be a fun time, and a film that you can whip out and watch with the guys with beers chilling in the fridge and pizza is on its way. But, I think the need to make this such a violent action film caused the filmmakers to overlook several things, including performances. This is definitely worth a watch, and even an own, if you buy movies frequently. It's just not perfect, so know what you're getting into before you make that purchase. This movies passes my grades, but it's not worth any over-praising.

STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS will pull you in

RATED- PG-13

RUN TIME- 132 MINS

WRITER(S)- ROBERTO ORCI, ALEX KURTZMAN, AND DAVID LINDELOF

STARRING- CHRIS PINE, ZACHARY QUINTO, AND ZOE SALDANA

DIRECTOR- J.J. ABRAMS

Synopsis taken from IMDb

After the crew of the Enterprise find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction. 

Growing up, I was a huge Star Trek fan. As a child, I owned the entire series of action figures from "The Next Generation", along with The Enterprise, Transporter, and other diorama sets for the figures. I actually got my love for the series from my dad, who is a serious Trekkie. However, as I grew up and got into horror, I left all that stuff behind. I haven't watched an episode of the show in, I don't know how many years! 

In 2009, when J.J. Abrams released his first film in this franchise, I was an instant fan. I won't say that it got me back into the series but, I really enjoyed the fresh take on the characters. As well as how brilliant the story was written, and how it crossed over with the original series' timeline. So after missing it in theaters, and having to hunt it down from five Redbox machines, I was finally able to sit down and watch, "Into Darkness".

Much like it's predecessor, "Into Darkness" starts instantly with intense action and stays entertaining throughout. Aside from the one-liners, I enjoyed this one almost as much as I did the first film! Again, the action sequences are awesome, and borderline epic. Same goes for the cgi. I said it on Twitter, and I stand by the fact that J.J. Abrams has done to this series what Chris Nolan did to the Batman series, and I like it a lot.

I'm really satisfied that this one doesn't drop the ball, and keeps on rolling. The stakes are raised extensively high, this is to be expected when you have Khan as the main villain. I really liked Benedict Cumberbatch's performance as Khan, and rather than compare it to Ricardo Montalban's version of the character, I welcome it as a new take. A few people told me going into this that I shouldn't watch it with a hardcore Trekkie because they'll pick it apart with how it differentiates with the older flicks. Unfortunately, I watched this with my dad, so I didn't exactly take the advice given to me but, he liked it, the same as me.

There's a scene between Kirk (Chris Pine) and Spock (Zachary Quinto) that I found profoundly sad. Good news is, it doesn't last long. There's a lot of rich story and character development between Spock and James Kirk, and we see them grow as characters. It's a nice touch to see them get along for once, instead of always being at each others' throats, like in the prior film.

This movie has a lot of underlying political tones that you can smell a mile a way. Especially when it comes to war. Some very serious and deep messaging in there. And what is great about this movie, is that it manages to go really dark, and takes risks. Things happen to characters all throughout that you don't expect, and aren't anticipating. It manages to stay fresh but, stay true to what we expect. Which is a hard thing to juggle.

"Into Darkness" is full of heart and hope, friendship, honor, and family. It's as uplifting and positive as it is dark. Managing a perfect balance of sinking so low, and then reaching so high, you're left excited and thrilled. Unfortunately, J.J. Abrams has announced he won't be on board for the third film due to being asked to shoot the new "Star Wars" film. I can truly say that he'll be missed, and I can only hope that they find a suitable replacement who will keep this series on the right track. Rupert Wyatt (Rise of the Planet of the Apes) has been rumored to possibly be on board.

Aside from some senseless dialog at some points, and some over-the-top acting, "Into Darkness" is an overall success.

KICK-ASS 2 is a solid sequel

RATED- R

RUN TIME- 103 MINS

WRITER(S)- JEFF WADLOW, MARK MILLAR, AND JOHN ROMITA Jr.

STARRING- AARON TAYLOR-JOHNSON, CHLOE GRACE MORETZ, AND CHRISTOPHER MINTZ-PLASSE

DIRECTOR- JEFF WADLOW

Synopsis taken from IMDb

The costumed high-school hero Kick-Ass joins with a group of normal citizens who have been inspired to fight crime in costume. Meanwhile, the Red Mist plots an act of revenge that will affect  everyone Kick-Ass knows.

I liked the first film a lot more than I ever expected to, so I was ready going into this one. I haven't heard much about it, I stay away from spoilers as often as I can. I've only read two reviews on it I believe, both of which were positive. 

I like how it starts, Dave Lizewski/Kick-Ass (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) no longer fighting crime, but others around the city have picked up where he left off. He's inspired a group of vigilantes that call themselves superheros, just like he once did. Even though you can see where this storyline will inevitably end up, it's still enjoyable. Dave meets up with his former pal Mindy Macready/Hit Girl (Chloe Grace Moretz), and she gets him back into training and fighting crime. Dave starts taking everything a bit more seriously, and is proud to be partners with Mindy.

There's a lot of growing, both physically and mentally, from Dave and Mindy. All of which is fantastic.

After Mindy decides to give up fighting crime, Kick-Ass joins forces with a team of masked superhero's headed by Colonel Stars and Stripes (Jim Carey). Carey gives a very good performance for this film, and is one of the most memorable things about this sequel. As a team they conquer the streets and shut down criminals left and right. Donald Faison is in this flick as well, and he plays Dr. Gravity. Another memorable and funny character. 

Chris D'Amico/The Red Mist (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) is hellbent on revenge and takes things to a new extreme, which doesn't limit his new name, which he gives himself when he decides to become the worlds first super-villain. He now goes by The Mother F'er, in short, and even though Plasse seems to be the same damn character in every movie he's in, he still pulls off the annoying character. All the while I was just waiting for Kick-Ass to beat the hell out of him. In the name of his deceased father, The Mother F'er hires a team of ex-cons and street criminals to join his army in alliance to kill Kick-Ass and destroy the city.

Like the first film, I really adore how they are able to balance such humor and ridiculousness with serious vibes. It gets very dark and gritty really quickly, and there's a lot of death. But it never loses it's quirkiness. And while this film kept me happy, nothing changes that it doesn't have that magic that the first one had. I believe this is as close as you can get to capturing that lightning in a bottle again.

The acting is over-the-top, but exactly what it needs to be for this type of film. The story isn't as strong, although all of the stakes are upped. Without the origin story the original film had, this one almost falls flat aside from the action. However, the story between Dave and Mindy is well done, and adds a great depth to the story, stopping the story from becoming weak and too much action. There's also good character story and development with Dave and his father, which I liked a lot. They do the same with Mindy, showing her home life and how she interacts with her new dad, Detective Marcus Williams (Morris Chestnut) after her real father's passing.

The climax of the film is touching and well written. Full of despair, hope, and strength, as well as blood and violence. We're left wondering if there's going to be a third film. My sources have told me that a 3rd installment probably will happen, this just leaves me guessing what it will be about? Hopefully they won't do a third and fall into the trilogy curse. We'd rather have just two good movies than to have two good movies and one bad one. Hopefully they aren't reaching too far in order to make a third happen.

All in all, "Kick-Ass 2" is a solid action film that'll invoke all emotions in you from sadness, to complete happiness and laughter. It's a blast, and if you liked the first motion picture, you're bound to like this one. I left the theater satisfied, and I guess as a movie buff, that's all I can ask for. I'm definitely glad this film happened. It kick's ass!

Pacific Rim Defines Epic

RATED- PG-13
RUN TIME- 132 MINS
WRITER(S)- TRAVIS BEACHAM AND GUILLERMO DEL TORO
STARRING- CHARLIE HUNNAM, IDRIS ELBA AND RINKO KIKUCHI
DIRECTOR- GUILLERMO DEL TORO



Synopsis taken from IMDb
As a war between humankind and monstrous sea creatures wages on, a former pilot and a trainee are paired up to drive a seemingly obsolete special weapon in a desperate effort to save the world from the apocalypse.  




In a world where the apocalypse has been done what seems like a billion times over, leave it to none other than Guillermo Del Toro to fascinate us with not only something completely original, but truly epic. Earlier this year when the trailer hit, I was extremely excited for this film to land. And now that it has, I'm even more pumped because it was even better than my expectations built it up to be.

Truthfully speaking, this film is just completely amazing. I can't believe how good it is! It's one of those rare films where after you walk out of the theater, the first conversation piece is when you're seeing it again. This is one of those movies that I think everyone on the planet should see at least once in their lives, it should make everyone's bucket list. There wasn't a boring part in the entire film, the whole duration is thrilling and gripping, and it's damned near impossible to take your eyes off of the screen.

If you follow Del Toro as closely and loyally as I do, than you know his creative side, and that his creatures in every film are always unique and different. This film is no different. Despite the amount of Kaiju's shown in the film, they're all brilliantly designed and different. Nothing else considered, just looking at the intricate monsters is enjoyment enough. Not to mention the Jaeger's, which are fantastic as well.

The action scenes are unlike anything you've seen before, they're totally new and mesmerizing. I can't recall another film that's had action sequences of this proportion before, and I know the term gets thrown around a lot, but "Pacific Rim" is absolutely 100% epic. It's consumes and enthralls you from the opening scene until the end. There is nothing that isn't spectacular about this film! And the 3D is gorgeous! This is probably the best film in 3D I've ever seen.

One of the most important things that I have to say about this film, is that they did a very good job of keeping a lot of the film out of the trailers. You may think you know about this film from what commercials you've seen, but it's a whole other motion picture than what you'd expect! I love that. Even though I did like the "Evil Dead" remake, I have to admit that the best parts of that film were spoiled in the trailers. That is not the case with this masterpiece. This may just be Guillermo Del Toro's greatest film to date, it's definitely the most enjoyable.

I also have to mention Charlie Hunnam's performance. Although he can tend to be a little stiff sometimes, he really came out of his shell in this film as Raleigh Becket. I'm truly glad, because I feel that sometimes he can get overlooked as an actor. So it's really satisfying to see him showing off a different side of himself and playing someone completely new! Great job all around on the cast. And Idris Elba is phenomenal as Stacker Pentecost, and he rivals Hunnam.

There is only two small flaws that I found with this film. One of them being a spoiler, so I'm not spilling the beans, though it has nothing to do with a twist or the end of the film. And the other being that I don't feel that the fact that it was the end of the world was stressed enough. It's mentioned a few times, but due to the fact that you don't see any civilians living their lives, and how the Kaiju invasion has impacted them, you don't get a real connection that it's the apocalypse. Nonetheless, this is truly a near-perfect film. It's very, very close, and I haven't given a film this high of a rating in years. 

It may be clichè, but the best word to describe this film is breathtaking. I reckon I'll see this film at least 5 more times when it comes out on Blu-Ray. This is the movie the world needs right now. This is what summer blockbusters are supposed to be.