Quick Hits

Hey folks! Things have been hectic lately, for both Mike and myself, but never fear. We have more posts on the way I assure you, but until then I wanted to send out some quick reviews and hits from movies I've seen recently. Some of them certainly would benefit from further analysis but for the sake of time (or lack there of) I'm condensing them.

The Help

All the talk about this feel-good movie is aimed at Emma Stone but let me clear the air here. Emma Stone is not the star of this movie. She's funny, sassy, and likable, and this role is probably a pivotal one that will alter her career down the Julie Roberts path rather than the Cameron Diaz path, i.e. she can act. The show is stolen by Viola Davis as Aibileen Clark as the vulnerable but fueled maid who really ignites the controversy, as Stone's "Skeeter" is merely a vessel. Davis carries all the emotional weight and has the most to lose the whole time, she is the real hero of this feel good story despite what the Oscar talk would have you believe. It's not a movie for everyone, but I'm sure even a few guys would see the quality this film has.

Rating: 4 out of 5.

Friends with Benefits

What appears to be a fairly generic romantic comedy here really is much more. Why? How 'bout Justin Timberlake's boyish charm? This isn't a gay thing, he's just very fun to watch every time he's on the screen. Mila Kunis is good as well but Timberlake makes this movie worth watching. Well, that and the great supporting cast (namely Woody Harrelson and Emma Stone) who maximize each moment of screen time they get. But most importantly, FWB doesn't try to horribly disguise itself behind a cheesy gimmick (see: Killers, Bounty Hunter, What Happens in Vegas, The Ugly Truth, etc.), instead it's simply about two people going through with life. My only beef is that no matter how different it tries to feel, every RomCom is doomed to repeat the same ending.

(Note: What does it say that of the four movies listed above, Katherine Heigel and Aston Kutcher star in two of them, together in one. What does that say about how awful they are? What would Heigel be without Knocked Up? And at least Kutcher is smart enough to latch onto a winning TV show before he completely flamed out.)

Rating: 3.5 out of 5.

Captain America: The First Avenger

Perhaps the single most anticipated movie this year in my head. If you told me one year ago that I wouldn't see this movie until almost a month after it was released, I'd blame everything on director Joe Johnston. But I'm happy to say that there is little blame to pass. Captain America is well-cast, well-paced, and damn entertaining. Chris Evans works as Steve Rogers, which proves vastly more important than how he works as Captain America (btw, also good). Most importantly, Capt. has good action and drama from start to finish. It's a really great blend of history and fantasy but I must admit I've one minor gripe: the score. Every other recent Marvel film has had an outstanding score (most notably The Incredible Hulk) and The Dark Knight raised the bar. Captain tries to push an older style, much like the Indiana Jones films, but in some spots it simply feels out of place and a bit of nuisance. For casual movie-goers, it won't hardly be noticed though.

Rating: 4 out of 5.

Most Human Heroes List

by Steve Kochems

While impatiently awaiting our furniture and living essentials from Buffalo, my girlfriend and I decided to sit down and watch the Indiana Jones trilogy. Now, those who know me think this is going to turn into another rant about one of the three, but it isn’t going to. I promise. Rather, it dawned on me after the less than impressive Green Lantern that superhero movies might be wearing down because they often retread familiar territory, namely the fact that they in some way or another acquire super human powers (Batman and the Punisher being the lone exceptions, though I would argue Batman’s super power at times is money, making him the best superhero to invest in).

So while watching the Indy films, I realized that some of the best heroes we have in classic films are in fact very ordinary people and are much more human than super. More often than not, these iconic action heroes are the result of an incredibly well-written script. Whether they’ve misplaced their shoes or see that X marks the spot, these moments usually stem from a script that is forced to be creative and clever, ironically as a result of the fact that the hero is a mere human.

Now before I go ahead and make a list that I’ll be horribly criticized for, whether by a bad addition or omission, I’m going to just say right now I’m not including James Bond into this simply for the reason that after a couple of films, the story forced him to be superhuman. That’s not to say any of these character below haven’t been, but not over a span of 22 films. Sure, a few have had unnecessary sequels, but Bond kept being regurgitated for us until Martin Campbell’s Casino Royale. I’d love to add Daniel Craig’s Bond because he’s based more in reality, he strangles people, he can be poisoned and shot. But I don’t want to omit movies from a character either (okay, I’d like to but I won’t). So Bond has to be left off here, sorry.

So here’s my list for the most heroic humans in cinema.

Jason Bourne (The Bourne Identity)

Our favorite assassin turned amnesia patient, Bourne will kill you with a pen. That’s one of the first big action sequences we see of Mr. Bourne and we absolutely love it. Or how ‘bout a magazine? You can’t sit in a waiting room with this guy and feel safe. Seriously, if he can kill you with a pen he can kill you with anything. But my favorite moment in the Bourne Identity is a small scene when he sits down in a coffee shop and realizes he knows every visible attribute about the diner and those in it, more importantly though he doesn’t know why. He’s a man simply searching for himself, and killing anyone who disrupts that.

Bryan Mills (Taken)

I wouldn’t be surprised if some people gripe about this choice ahead of Bourne, but Mills only takes one film to get his revenge, so he gets points for that (sure, Bourne is working on a larger scale, but that’d ruin my reasoning). But also he’s the centerpiece for a film that walks a dark line but never crosses it. And of course Mills is a total bad ass, whether it’s electrocuting people or shooting anyone who stands between him and his daughter, friends included. That’s what makes him one of the most interesting people on this list… that and if I’d kept him off he’d torture me until I put him on here.

Ellen Ripley (Alien)

Sigourney Weaver’s Ripley was not only a mark of change in gender roles for modern cinema, but a mark in narratives in general. She’s strong and plays the mother of her ship, battling crazed aliens and their queen for control. It’s a clash of different worlds and Ripley is the centerpiece, looking to protect and defend her kin at all costs. (I know eventually she turns into an Alien or something… but this is basically for the first two films). I’d have her higher on the list, but since the film takes place in space she’s got more technology at her disposal than, say…

John McClain (Die Hard)

One of the most likable and American characters in modern cinema, McClane is basically a schlub that just gets caught up in a bad spot. But in the hairiest of situations, McClane is clever, bold, and everything you could ever want in an action hero. He’s the staple for dozens of movies that tried to be everything Die Hard was but always fell short. In fact, there’s only one man I’d say is more American and bold then Mr. John McClane…

Indiana Jones (Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark)

I tried really hard to talk myself into someone else, to find another character that embodied heroism more than Indy. Mainly it was because I knew I led this article with him and knew it would make the ending anti-climactic. But lo, it can’t be anyone else. The man that found the Lost Ark and the Cup of Christ to kept it from the Nazi’s. The bold, borderline reckless man who when he’s tired of fighting street thugs pulls out his gun and shoots them. Never mind the fourth installment that lacked logic and hoped to disguise itself behind the likability of old Indy; this isn’t the forum to complain about that. We can only hope that if or, as some have said, when a fifth movie comes around, the trend of quality continues and Mr. Lucas allows him to finally ride off into the sunset (for good this time).

Anyone you don’t think should be on here? Or notable omissions? Post them below!

A Sidebar: Green Lantern

by Steve Kochems

Something’s bothered me the past few days and I wasn’t entirely sure what until now. It’s not the new west coast time, or the lack of clouds in Fresno, CA (they have none apparently). No, it was a scene in the Green Lantern, which I reviewed a few days ago. And now, at 4:40 in the morning, I’m gonna talk this out with myself.

(WARNING: This rant CONTAINS SPOILERS and is NOT my official review of the film)

Most of us could probably agree that superhero movies, and hell, most action, sci-fi, or fantasy movies in general, are about someone going through extraordinary changes or events and emerging as the better man, sometimes physically and/or mentally, but almost always ethically. However this scene, and in turn the movie as a whole, I’m gonna discuss goes against that rule. Why? Because it makes the Green Lantern Corps philosophy and Hal Jordan himself an elitist asshole.

Stay with me.

So the scene is that Hector Hammond, previously a social reject and disappointment to Andy Dufresne, has become infected with some alien contamination and has telepathic powers from a fear entity. However, it has caused him to look even more deformed as his head is gigantic and he sweats all the time, in addition to the already creepy Malkovich look he had going on.

Hector wants to make it as a scientist and gets his big break with this whole alien business and his dad hooking him up. Meanwhile, Hal Jordan gets chosen by a magical ring to be given special powers because the ring “saw something in him.” It’s attracted to fearlessness, you know... like a high school girl.

Now, I’m not against these lead-in’s above, however these two things collide in the scene that’s been keeping me from sleeping and create some moral questions as to what the film is suggesting. After Hector’s killed his dad for being a dick, he kidnaps Hal’s love interest Carol, a woman who Hal could have admittedly had but chose not to because he would’ve “screwed it up,” somewhere in a corner Hector cried because he was an ugly dude who never got the chance. Hal shows up to save the day and tells Big Head he’ll give him the Green Lantern ring if he lets her go, so that he can “be anyone, do anything.”

The whole crux of Hector kidnapping her is because he’s loved her since childhood but she’s never given him the time of day or chance because he looks like this guy to my left here.

Instead she’s been flying around with Hal, dropping him the occasional free-bang while he continues not to commit or give a shit. He wants to be like Hal, look like Hal, you know, so he can have a chance.

So Hector accepts the ring and puts it on. He then says he lied and wouldn’t let her go regardless. To me, this makes no sense for Hector’s character and is just thrown in there because he’s the bad guy and he’s gotta say that. Why would he want her to look mutated now if he can make himself look attractive enough for her? (Sidebar on the Sidebar: he’s a telepath at this point, how the hell did he not see this very obvious trick coming?)

However, our hero has lied as well, saying that the ring has to choose you and not just anyone can use it. “Haha! Jokes on you asshole!” Somewhere I hoped to find a picture of the Green Lantern punching a poor immigrant family with a similar caption.

The ring swoops back to Hal and he blasts poor Hector in the face and catches Carol from falling and keeps her from being injected with urine or whatever that was. I guess it’s a good thing he’s handsome, otherwise he wouldn’t be able to do all that. And then poor Hector is incinerated and Hal flies off into space to punch a giant cloud into the sun (Another Sidebar on the Sidebar: if the Green Lantern can create anything they can think of, why not just create a sun?).

So let’s recap what this scene really honors and encourages: looks over brains. Changing to be liked over being who you are. Lying if you hope the villain is lying. Being chosen (fate) over choosing your own fate. And let’s recap the qualities of our hero vs. demi-villain: fearless, liar, childish, unable to commit, and being “chosen” for better things (the foundation for Social Darwinism, by the way) vs. smart, responsible, ugly, also a liar (though without reason) and apparently pre-doomed.

They both had daddy issues, but while Hal’s dad died a hero and should’ve left him with great memories, Hal has awful flashbacks about him for the first 1/3 of the film then everybody just forgets about it (final Sidebar on the Sidebar: why doesn’t Sinestro or Hector, or Paralax for that matter, use this memory against him? The whole first third of the film is suggesting that that will be the big thing for him to have to overcome in the finale but they just drop it. Why!?). But poor Hector’s dad is the Senator who loves Hal and Carol, he seems to like everyone else as his kid except Hector- probably didn’t love him because he was a balding weirdo. Was anyone sad when Senator Dufrane died? Didn’t think so.

I guess this all makes sense though- they had to make Peter Parker look attractive before he could become a hero, take off his nerd glasses and puff out his chest real big. Yeah, that way no one will confuse him with a villain, all heroes are pretty people with great smiles.

Hector never did anything bad before he found out all the things people were saying behind his back. You know, Wolverine kills a ton of people just for breaking into a house but nobody gives him shit for it. His general description as a person sounds like a much more traditional protagonist for a movie than fly-boy GQ cover Hal, who probably had his socks dry cleaned afterwards to be sure none of Hector’s poor-man ashes got on them.

I know the whole theme was supposed to be about humans being courageous and standing up in the face of fear rather than pretending they are above it (which I like a lot), but Hal Jordan in this comparison to Hector, and especially in this scene, doesn’t sound like a hero. Bruce Wayne isn’t a hero because he’s rich or powerful but because he wants to inspire people, to do things for the greater good, to sacrifice himself. And he chooses to do these things. That’s the whole basis of the end of Batman Begins.

Hal is chosen and rejects the responsibility because that’s a long way to fly for union meetings. Then he accepts the power to save a few people, crashes a galactic conference to discuss a personal problem, then let’s poor Hector get murdered and finally punches the Paralax in space after overcoming his fear of dust. Great arc Hal, you’re a modern day hero. Then he flies back, kisses the girl and flies away, once again unable to commit and has better shit to do. It’s a good thing he looks that good so he can get some alien ass on the side.

The Green Lantern, an elitist asshole.

Green Lantern

by Steve Kochems

A few weeks ago I posted a preview on the upcoming comic book movies this summer. I previewed the first blockbuster of the year (Thor), the end to a trilogy that someone swore would be better than the previous two films (Transformers 3), the most anticipated and crucial superhero to Marvel Comics (Captain America: The First Avenger), and the resurrection of a Brett Ratner executed set of heroes (X-Men: First Class). But in the midst of these, someone pointed out that I had forgotten all about the Green Lantern. Oops...

I figured that if the movie wasn’t looking good enough for me to even remember it when previewing its very own sub-genre mere weeks before its release, then I wasn’t going to say very many nice things about it anyway. But lo, I do in fact have some nice things to say about Green Lantern.

We follow Hal Jordan, played once again by a well-cast Ryan Reynolds (sidebar: I don’t think I’ve ever seen a movie starring Ryan Reynolds that I can say I dislike. Even Van Wilder and The Proposal I thought had some decent moments… Oh God, I’ve admitted too much. Evac!), who is chosen by the Green Lantern Ring to become its next bearer. And it turned out to be great timing too as the Paralax, which is a galactic entity of fear (or something along those lines) is killing off Green Lanterns and consuming entire civilizations.

I’d talk more about the supporting cast but if I can be honest (which I can, it’s my blog), they really aren’t worth it. Mark Strong isn't given nearly enough screen time so we never get to know Sinestro well enough to even care (especially after the credits). Same for Peter Sarsgaard, doing his best Malkovich impression (I'll get to him more later) and his dad, Senator Someone (played by a completely under utilized but delightful Tim Robbins). And Blake Lively as his fellow pilot Carol isn’t all too great either and her love story with Hal just seems to be in the way of showing us more cool green shit.

That being said, I can tell you right now there is a ton of cool green shit in this movie. Since the Green Lantern suits are mostly CGI, I must give credit to the effects team on this one. Little things like the electrons zapping around the suit give it so much more credibility and is vastly more interesting than anything they could’ve done in reality, which is ultimately what makes Green Lantern worth watching.

Making a good superhero movie is hard. Making a good superhero movie with cosmic battles and legit aliens is even harder, trust me. But Lantern does it pretty well. It’s just a shame the rest of the cast (and characters for that matter) are rushed and ultimately pretty dispensable to the story. The closest we get to knowing or caring about any of them is Carol, and we’re still pretty distant from her even by the end of the film.

I wouldn’t say Green Lantern is a good movie but I really wouldn’t say it’s a bad one either. I question some of its editing, as it tries to inter-cut Hal’s journey with Hector (scientist who becomes a villain, the description is as generic as the character really) but starts that too late in the film for us to really follow both their journeys and how they ultimately become different people. And if that wasn’t their intent, we never really worry or feel threatened by Hector because we know the real villain is Paralax.

However, despite the gripes, I can say the effects are worth the price of admission, as is Reynolds. I’d watch it if it were on TV, but I wouldn’t fly across the universe for it.

Rating: 3 out of 5

X-Men: First Class

by Steve Kochems

Since the post-credits surprise of Iron Man, Marvel Entertainment has pushed their focus toward the upcoming Avengers film in every other stand-alone superhero movie within their universe. With the lone exception being the blue-balling Wolverine, all things Marvel seemed ready to live and die on the success of the Avengers… until now.

X-Men: First Class is proof that Marvel Entertainment always has and will probably always have the most depth and universal success in mainstream cinema. Christopher Nolan’s Batman film’s aside, Marvel has been a slam-dunk over DC. Even if he (Nolan) were to spearhead a Justice League film, First Class does such a great job of setting the stage for more early X-Men films to come that they could strike back, should the Avenger happen to fail. The two most important characters to that universe are so fresh and well-cast; I expect a sequel to be green-lit almost immediately.

With that being said, I come to one of the few problems I have with First Class. Fox didn’t seem sure about this film, or at least they wanted a bonafied winner before they put any more money in the franchise that had clearly worn down. After the credits rolled I could only wonder how much better the movie could’ve been if it had been given the go ahead for three films rather than one. It forced director Matthew Vaughn (Kick-Ass) to skim over a few characters that desperately needed more screen time than what they were given here.

However, I can say for sure that Vaughn was smart enough to keep a film so rich with Marvel characters grounded on the two essential ones here. James McAvoy as Charles Xavier and Michael Fassenbender as Erik Lensher are outstanding choices and are the reason First Class soars above all three other X-Men films. Fassenbender’s vengeance is perfectly counterbalanced by McAvoy’s blind optimism, and all the while we get to sit watching the friendship form and eventually fall apart.

This isn’t to say that the film leaves it’s predecessors behind. The opening scene is so close to how Bryan Singer’s X-Men opens, I thought it may have been lifted straight from that film (which wouldn’t be such a surprise as Singer was a producer on First Class). There are also a few nuggets toward the possible future for die-hard fans, such as mention of William Stryker and a few nice cameos that try to keep the original X-Men films tied in (like a mutant you may see again in the very near future).

All in all, I think First Class may yet be the best film I’ve seen this year. Granted, I’m a big fan of the comic book genre and how it has evolved since the first X-Men, but any lover of good stories and character can enjoy what this film brings to the screen. I can’t help but compare it to J.J. Abrams' recent Star Trek reboot, as both franchises were in a decaying state and fresh young directors took the iconic characters, recast them into their younger forms, and brought new excitement to them that reaches beyond die-hard fans of the comics or series. It’s simply good story-telling and crisp pacing that does this and helps it appeal to the masses.

As a fan of the superhero genre and good narratives in general, my only complaint still remains that Marvel (and Fox) didn’t believe enough in the film to let it expand as they did for the eventual Avengers. Hollywood seems starved right now for a classic trilogy that doesn’t flame out in it's finale. And while The Dark Knight Rises is likely to do this, it surprises me that Marvel chose not to try and rival it right away after its two previous disappointing attempts at it (especially now that Jon Favreau will not be directing Iron Man 3).

I’m straying a bit from the film itself on this review, I know, but I just have had trouble getting over the missed opportunity here. As a kid, I truly loved spending a rainy Saturday watching all three Back to the Futures, or Indiana Jones', or Star Wars films… Hell, this past weekend I even endured all three Lord of the Rings (extended editions!). Maybe it’s just me that’s starving here, but I hope not. I hope that the next film (assuming there is one) can be as fresh and exciting as this. Then I’ll have nothing to complain about.

Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

Pirates of the Caribbean 4: On Stranger Tides

by Steve Kochems

Pirates of the Caribbean 4: On Stranger Tides embodies so much of what is wrong with Hollywood in the last 15 years. I know, bold statement for a movie I can’t entirely trash because it’s ending begs for the audience to just accept this as a rough transition into a new set of films- but seriously, mermaids that look like vampires? C’mon Bruckheimer, you're killing me!

See, once upon a time Disney released a film about a young blacksmith who set off on a magical journey with a swarthy pirate in hopes of winning the hand of a governor’s daughter (i.e. a princess) by defeating a band of invincible and menacing pirates. It was a classic tale, not unlike The Princess Bride or the Star Wars saga before it.

However, like so many iconic characters to emerge from simplistic stories like those just mentioned, people aren’t satisfied with the taste they have been given, even if the story completes the character to a degree. I’m not judging anyone because I often feel the same way, however it can often completely ruin a character with a poorly written story or completely erode what lasting effect they previously had by over exposing us to them. The shark in Jaws is more terrifying before you see the shark- mysterious and the unknown are things we naturally fear.

With this, I get to Pirates 4, a new beginning to the series that is falling faster than Jon Edwards political career. Okay, maybe that’s a bit of an exaggeration, but the series continues its steady slide here. Johnny Depp returns as Captain Jack Sparrow, a character he seems to have brought to every role he’s played in the last decade, and his search for the Fountain of Youth. However, Jack seems less concerned with this quest and more with who seems to be impersonating him in London for a third of the film.

Also returning to the film is Captain Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush), who is now employed by his majesty’s royal navy to seek out the Fountain before the Spanish, and Jack’s right-hand man Mr. Gibbs, who seems dragged along more so this time than in previous adventures. Two new additions are Penelope Cruz’s Angelica, the female version of Jack, and Ian MacShane’s Black Beard, a malicious pirate who’s reputation precedes him.

Unfortunately, that reputation is supposed to carry our fear of Black Beard throughout the film. Granted, his daughter often intervenes in her pursuit to save his soul and we do see the extent of his power when he is first revealed, but he never is as cunning as Barbossa was in Curse of the Black Pearl, nor as ruthless as Davey Jones in the second or third film. Bad guys don’t back down because their daughter says so, not the ones we fear at least (Note by Mike: Steve has obviously never heard of Willow Smith...).

As for Angelica, the tone seems to want to live and die with her. When she’s happy, we should be happy. When she’s angry, we should be angry, or sad, etc. But we never get there fully because her character is so similar to Jack. When Jack is marooned in the first film, we feel his sorrow and abandonment because until that point he had been always two steps ahead of everyone. It’s also in that moment we find out his miracle escape was a fraud. He begins to question himself and we, in turn, feel that with him. Angelica is never as likable because her true intentions are kept secret and the audience is already accustom to following one character who walks the moral line. Trying to add a second doesn’t always work.

But for all my complaints, I will say that the film does try to plead itself to the viewer at the end. After the credits rolled, my first thought was that Disney shoehorned in another arc in for Jack just to move on with the series. And while it had initially angered me, I considered that maybe they knew On Stranger Tides was going to have a rough transition regardless. Dead Man’s Chest and At World’s End seemed to tire the audience out and any fresh start was still going to have to escape that shadow first.

So with that, I believe the already green-lit Pirates 5 has a lot to be optimistic about, even though On Stranger Tides is a much less than solid film.

Rating: 2.5 out of 5

The Green Zone

by Steve Kochems

Most of my favorite war films are from the World War II era because it is seems to be the most justified war in modern times. It’s clear-cut who is good, who is bad, and why we care about the cause because of its time period. Even Enemy at the Gates, which has us rooting for a Soviet sniper, follows this basic format. However when we start to delve into other eras (Vietnam, Desert Storm, etc.), things begin to get a little hazier. Now, any personal opinions aside, this is strictly because these conflicts have had more grey area to deal with. In fact, it is the personal opinions (and media spins) that make them so difficult to separate who is good and bad, often resulting in conspiracy theories and wild plot twists.

With that, we get to the Matt Damon led Green Zone, a film that follows the story of Chief Roy Miller and his 85th squad of WMD searchers in Iraq. A film that’s as heavy on story and seeking the truth as an early episode of the X-Files, which comes at the cost of things that go boom. Miller (Damon) questions the authenticity of high level sources on the local of WMD’s in Iraq. This leads him on a search through the war-torn Iraq for the truth about the Intel, WMD’s, and what was used to draw the American citizens into supporting the War in Iraq.

Among the War in Iraq movies made since the war began in 2003, Green Zone does in fact stand out as one of the better done films, though not to the level of the Oscar-Winning Hurt Locker. Damon plays an excellent everyman soldier who carries the weight of this film that’s heavy in emotional proximity to its audience.

Unfortunately, Green Zone takes a solid stance on one side of the argument. And while it is widely agreed that there never were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, it is still too close in our history for me to ever want to jump on board with them. Many people today have friends or family who fought and died in a war whose justification is still up in the air, and debating it only rubs salt in those still fresh wounds.

To be frank, I think Green Zone is a well done movie through and through but its final act shoves the initial post-war reaction into our faces when many of us might not be ready for it yet. No matter what the government or media did right or wrong, the results have already happened. Soldiers who may never walk again due to shrapnel or can’t maintain normal lives because of post-traumatic stress won’t have their lives back to normal because we know the truth. For me, this film just comes too soon and might do well to sit aside for some time.

Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

Click (2006)

by Steve Kochems

Summer is here and all the big blockbusters are around the corner. We've already seen the God of Thunder crash into theaters and Johnny Depp returned as Captain Jack Sparrow earlier this week at Cannes. But since I've been banned from international travel as a result of an empty bank account, I had to settle for Adam Sandler's comedy Click.

Now, from my point of view I think Sandler's filmography has been much like an avalanche. Billy Madison aside (though I do think it's funny), they start out with a little pebble of heart, just enough to keep you warm between the comedic gags. But as the years passed, Sandler has continued to try and shove any thematic moral he can pull out of a plot while trying to maintain its completely absurd premise. With that, we have our low point and the obliteration of Sandler's credibility for choosing good films.


But in the middle of this slow moving disaster, we have Click. A film about a workaholic (Sandler) who acquires a remote from a mysterious figure (Christopher Walken) and now has the ability to fast forward and rewind parts of his life which leads him on a journey about what should really matter in our lives. Anyone who hasn't seen the movie can still probably guess the ending.

I am curious as to how writers Steve Koren and Mark O'Keefe had originally ended the film. It seemed aching for a cold twist, not a sappy Disney ending, about the reality of how precious each minute in our lives can be. But since it's a Sandler film we know it's going to go that route no matter how big of a prick our main character can be. There were countless moments I was actually glad that this selfish jerk had terrible things happen to him and I wished the film would end there, but no, it had to keep going...

My major problem with Click is Sandler, and not just because of what attaching him to the project meant for the story but also because he is the one tasked with carrying the emotional weight of the film, i.e. why we give a crap. A good example of a film who carries a similar thematic thread but does it with much more class is Jim Carrey's Bruce Almighty. I can't help but compare the two films because they have supernatural elements given to a man in a struggling career who's trying to balance his family life with work. For that matter, you could even throw Liar, Liar into this category. The big difference here is that for some reason Sandler forgot how to carry the emotional weight of the film. Carrey has proven to be an over the top comedic actor who can still anchor a theme (even while wrestling women), but Sandler simply doesn't have it in Click.

I'd like to give him some slack though, as the supporting cast only reassure the idea that this script could have been something funny with real consequence, but whether by the studio or Sandler's attachment it reverted into a childish version of A Christmas Carol. Kate Beckinsale does a nice job as a hot actress who would like to play a loving mother/wife, but I think they were hoping that she would actually come off as a loving mother/wife.

And as much as I love Christopher Walken, I can't help but think he, like Beckinsale, is only shoehorned into this movie because of his name rather than being good for the role of Morty. Not once do we ever get the angry, sharp tone of Walken that we've all come to know, but instead he's sympathetic to the plight of humanity and comes off as stale and boring.

I might be expecting too much out of Click, true, but I don't think I should have to dumb down my hope and optimism for incredibly drawn out fart jokes that I stopped finding funny years ago, you know, like when I grew up. I do think it's got an incredibly deep premise, full of possibility but squanders all of them in exchange for childish thoughts of farts, boobs, and, well, Adam Sandler. If that's your sort of thing, then maybe you'll love Click, and bless you for doing so. I myself simply wanted to fast-forward through it.

Rating: 2 out of 5

Thor (2011)

by Steve Kochems

A recent trip overseas graced me with the fortune of it becoming both business and pleasure. The question I wondered though was, which one would Marvel's Thor be?

In a preview I posted a few weeks ago, I said, based on what we'd seen thus far from the God of Thunder, that it would probably be as good as The Incredible Hulk (not an insult, but not a big compliment either). I worried about it becoming too campy or difficult to place in reality because of it's fantastical content, unlike the luxuries Iron Man or Batman Begins had.

But that being said.... I have to say I was pleasantly surprised with what Kenneth Branagh was able to do with the first installment with the mighty Thor. He juggles the two different worlds quite nicely and brings out some really good scenes where the two worlds inevitably clash (namely Thor's first few hours on Earth).

To be brief, the film follows the eager and juvenile Thor is thrust down to Earth after reigniting a war with the Frost Giants. Down here with us mortals, Thor must change and grow up so that he can be "worthy to possess the power of Thor."

Okay, that's incredibly brief but I don't want to spoil too much. The biggest positives of this film are fortunately the two most important characters: Thor and Loki. Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston were outstanding choices. Hemsworth is every bit as blindly arrogant as Hiddleston is deceptive and cunning and both make some major changes from the start to the end of the film.

On the flip side, I found the two Oscar winners in this cast to be on the blander side. At times Odin (Anthony Hopkins) can blow you away with his explosive temper and fury, but skates through other scenes as if it were cold out and his arthritis was acting up. In the same sense, Natalie Portman brings some youthful energy to some of her scenes but never really seems like the brilliant scientist Jane Foster is trying to be. These gripes though do take a backseat because for the most part these two are always on screen with either Hemsworth or Hiddleston, both who save even some of the blander scenes.

One major concern many people had for this was how it would play in with The Avengers. I don't entirely agree with the majority of people who say secondary characters like Black Widow and Nick Fury bogged down Iron Man 2 and I would say the same about this film here. Agent Coulson gets way more screen time than we've seen before but it all stays relegated into the story. Plus, fanboys get a few easter eggs, some obvious and some you need to listen a little closer for (Bruce Banner shout out).

Ironically, I was quite surprised by the end of the film, so far as how it correlates with what would be the next immediate film in the story of Thor (i.e. The Avengers). Though, by the time Marvel had greenlit the script for this film they were well aware of what would come next for the Norse God, so I have to assume they know what they're doing.

Unfortunately I can't say that I was really blown away by Thor. It was certainly a good movie and I'd see it again, but it brought very little to the table that wasn't expected. It didn't dig deep into a concrete theme or struggle for any character really, with Hiddleston clearly being the only one really trying to go there. However, if you're in the mood for some absurd action with a little magic, Thor might be right up your alley.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

Preview: Superhero Summer of 2011

by Steve Kochems

A few weeks ago I posted about the lack of upcoming films this spring with any intrigue, at least in my eyes. Aside from Battle: Los Angeles, I’ve stuck to my hibernating plan, and boy is it good.

But as May looms, I can’t help but think about the major superhero movies that are on the horizon. Captain America, Thor, X-Men: First Class, and Transformers 3 are the four films I’m primarily going to look at today and I will measure them up against my patent pending Superhero Movie Spectrum, posted below.

1	1.5
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen	Elektra
2	2.5
Daredevil	Watchmen
3	3.5
X-Men: Last Stand	Spider-Man 3
4	4.5
Transformers	Hulk
5	5.5
The Punisher	X-Men
6	6.5
X-Men Origins: Wolverine	The Incredible Hulk
7	7.5
Iron Man	300
8	8.5
Spider-Man 2	Batman Begins
9	9.5
X2	The Dark Knight
10
Sin City

So, without further adieu, here’s a quick look at what I like and what I dislike about four summer blockbusters that are just a few weeks away.

Thor – May 6, 2011

What I like about it:

Thor has probably the most well-known cast of all these films and that should help carry the epic nature it’s hoping to get across. I’ve also thought that Chris Hemsworth was a genuinely good choice as the God of Thunder, a choice as good as Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man. Here’s to hoping he can meet those expectations.

What I don’t like about it:

Thor’s setting is going to be the toughest to keep grounded in reality. Ever since Batman Begins, superhero movies (at least the good ones) have had the difficult task of bringing real science into a surreal world. Christopher Nolan and Jon Favreau have each done an excellent job of this, but director Kenneth Branagh has his work cut out for him. The trailers also worry me, while Asgard looks every bit as awesome as it should, I worry that it’s too quirky and dare I say campy for its own good.

Expectations:

I expect Thor to be a good movie but not a great one. It’ll certainly be watchable but more than likely will never be in the conversation with something like Sin City, probably right in line with Ed Norton’s The Incredible Hulk.

X-Men: First Class – June 3, 2011

What I like about it:

Again, the trailers have been outstanding. I was far less skeptical of the cast and crew for this film though, since Matthew Vaughn is one of the better young directors in Hollywood (see: Layer Cake, Kick-Ass… also produced Snatch and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels). I also think that this film has an additional layer to it that most comic book movies overlook, save Nolan’s Batman movies. This film has the possibility of horror overshadowing it, the power struggle between Charles Xavier and Magneto and how their friendship ruptures is almost certainly going to have lives at stake.

What I don’t like about it:

The content. I love comic book movies quite a bit, but after Brett Ratner’s bowel movement titled Last Stand, I was really turned off to the X-Men stories. I thought Wolverine was a fresh and fun take on his character and I was excited to see more of those (primarily a Magneto Origins film). But another ensemble film was decided upon again. Here’s hoping the Last Stand was just that and we get something fresh this time.

Expectations:

I actually expect the most out of this film, something I never would’ve believed had you told me this a year ago. James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender both are looking like outstanding casting decisions and having X-Men and X2 helmer Brian Singer on as a producer gives it major credit to draw it in line with the original films. Dare I say, it could be as good as X2? Or even the Dark Knight?

Transformers: Dark Side of the Moon – July 1, 2011

What I like about it:

Director Michael Bay responded to the massive outcry against the previous film, blaming the writer's strike as part of why the script suffered. An apology is better late than never I guess. He’s also claimed that this film will be the best of the three and many are inclined to believe him. Am I? Doubtful.

What I don’t like about it:

Yeah I don’t really believe Bay’s comment above but at least he’s trying something. Since it’s widely considered that Revenge of the Fallen was the worst thing since the Gigli, he might be doing this as a marketing ploy, pretend to apologize to get those suckers back in the seats! However I will admit the first film wasn’t entirely terrible. Yeah, the content isn’t my cup of tea but I’m willing to admit it’s a decent enough story and film that this one could in fact be just as good as that. But how good is that?

Expectations:

Very little. Bay’s films have continued to sacrifice story for the sake of just being louder. I’d be more optimistic if I actually thought the original content wasn’t somewhat laughable to begin with (then again, we have a Battleship movie on the horizon). So where on the scale does it rank? Elektra status, couldn’t care less.

Captain America – July 22, 2011

What I like about it:

The trailers. Everything from the set design, costumes, hell the overall environmental feel is really well conveyed (thus far), which surprised me. I worried a great deal about this movie with Joe Johnston (Jurassic Park 3, The Wolfman) at the helm and Chris Evans as the lead, but so far it’s really impressed me and may turn out to be the best film this summer.

What I don’t like about it:

Joe Johnston. He’s never really blown me away as a director and cutting a good trailer doesn’t always translate to a good film. Chris Evans would’ve also been listed here, but the way he’s handled interviews and how he’s looked in and out of the costume on screen has sold me. Joey boy has not, yet.

Expectations:

When the film was first green lit, they were huge. Then they filled the cast and crew and I worried. Then I saw the trailer and said "wow", this might actually work. So I don’t know what to expect. When in doubt, base it on the footage you’ve been able to see, and if I go that route, I think it’s going to be a pretty darn good film. Probably somewhere in line with the 300, so far as quality.

So that’s about it, we’ll see how accurate my predictions are and I’m excited to see (almost) all of these movies. Are you? Let us know what you think!