X-MEN MOVIE REVIEW

I have heard it said that X-Men was the beginning of the comic book movie genre that we have today.  I don’t know if that’s true, but it was definitely an important film in it’s own right.  It had a much more serious tone than previous films of its type.  I think that’s the reason this movie is looked at as being the genesis of where the genre is at 15 years later. 

 

                The movie takes place in the “not too distant future”.  In this world, some humans have evolved into mutants, which sparks a debate about what to do with them.  Meanwhile, former colleagues Eric Lensherr (Ian McKellen) and Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) form groups of mutants for completely different and conflicting purposes. 

                I found the debate about the mutants to be very interesting.  If this were to happen in real life I can see this issue coming up in exactly this way.  One side argues that the mutants are people and deserve the same treatment as everyone else.  The other side claims that mutants are too dangerous to be given equal rights.  There are good points to be made from both perspectives.  This issue was probably my favorite thing about the movie.  In fact, I wish they had done just a little more with that as a central plot point, instead of basically using it as a jumping off point. 

 

                The acting in the movie is very good.  Hugh Jackman seems born to play Wolverine, which this movie succeeded in turning into a totally cinematic character.  I loved the protective relationship he has with Rogue (Anna Paquin).  Those two were my favorite characters in the movie.  I also really liked the interactions between Ian McKellen’s Magneto and Patrick Stewart’s Professor Xavier.  The chemistry between the characters and actors was a big plus for this film.   

                One problem I had with the film was that it seemed like there were too many mutants.  Either that or maybe they just didn’t explain what everybody’s powers were well enough.  I kept getting a little confused about who could do what.  There were several characters that were key in the end that I didn’t feel like I knew all that well.  That is a small issue, but it made me think too much about the wrong things rather than focusing on the plot. 

 

                The first and third acts of the movie are terrific.  The first act is where the mutant debate takes center stage.  The third act is full of the good kind of tension and builds to a very entertaining and well-conceived climax.  The second act, on the other hand, drags a little bit.  It almost seems like the goal was to maintain the status quo rather than actually trying to advance the plot.  I think the movie may have needed another conflict or two somewhere in the middle. 

                Aside from a couple of problems I had with this movie, I thought it was actually a very good comic book film.  Bryan Singer (The Usual Suspects, Valkyrie) did a very good job of bringing this wildly popular comic franchise to the big screen.  A well-conceived plot and very good acting makes this movie what it is.  The Movie Man gives it 3.5 out of 5 stars. 

 

Please click the link and give my Facebook page a like.  https://www.facebook.com/reviewsmovieman?ref=aymt_homepage_panel

WORLD WAR Z MOVIE REVIEW

"Another zombie movie?" That was my first reaction upon seeing previews for World War Z. Over the past decade, I think we've all seen about enough of zombies and vampires. The challenge for this movie was clear. Somehow, it had to find a way to avoid being "just another zombie movie". 

 Marc Forster clearly made an effort to avoid beating a dead horse with his first venture in...to the zombie genre. Weather or not this movie succeeded in that regard is up for debate. I would have to say that it did. It looked more like a thriller than a horror or sci-fi flick, and that is a good thing. It was a lot more than a bunch of people running from flesh eating zombies. There was a legit plot line at work here.

The movie starts just as the initial zombie outbreak occurs. These are viral zombies, like in 28 Days Later, which I find a lot more believable than the classic undead zombies. Let's face it, if we ever have a zombie apocalypse, it will be caused by a rapid, wide spread viral outbreak, which is the case in this movie.

Brad Pitt plays Gerry Lane, A retired United Nations employee who is now a devoted father and husband. When the zombie-pocalypse begins, Gerry gets in touch with some former associates inside the government in an attempt to find safety for him and his family. After some pretty nice action/suspense sequences, they all end up on a ship out in the middle of the ocean, where Gerry learns that his family will be able to stay only if he helps find the source of the outbreak.

 The acting is very good in this movie. First of all, there is Brad Pitt of course, who is always great. I don't know if anybody else could have played this character and made him feel human. He was what all us men aspire to be; brave, compassionate, aggressive, and desperately trying to take care of his family. Pitt sells every bit of Gerry Lane and turns in a very sympathetic performance.

Someone who is going to be overlooked in this film is Mireille Enos, who plays Gerry's wife Karen. I had no idea who she was but she was pretty terrific.

While I like what they did with this story for the most part, there is one thing that happens pretty early on that didn't seem to make any sense to me. If you watch the movie you'll definitly notice it and probably scratch your head. Some of the plot got a little fuzzy at times with some confusing dialogue here and there. I almost got a little lost a couple times. Overall it was a pretty well written story for a movie like this, more so than I would have expected. Without spoiling anything, I really liked how they decided to try and resolve the situation. Brad Pitt has this idea all at once, kind of like an epiphany, and he thinks back to all the things that have happened that have supported this idea. In a way, the idea he had made some logical sense. That was refreshing to see. 

 The zombie effects were also a high point for me. They were actually pretty scary and threatening. At no point in the movie did the audience ever laugh at
something the zombies did, which is rare in this type of film. There were a few really breathtaking CGI scenes, like the one from the trailer where all the zombies are climbing on each other to get over that wall. There were good action sequences and some very suspensful quiet scenes in which somebody was trying to sneak around the zombies. It made the creatures seem more threatening that they didn't just charge head on and take them out like we have seen in a lot of these type of movies. The whole thing had a very realistic feel to it.

I disliked the ending a lot. I had an ending in my head that I wanted and they went a completely different way. It almost seemed to me like they ran out of time and just had to go ahead and rap it up. It didn't make any sense. The whole movie was paced really well and then the ending was rushed. I was very disappointed in that.

To sum up, it was a solid movie. It was probably the best Marc Forster movie I have seen. It was suspensful and scary and everything you want a thriller to be. Even if your not typically a fan of the zombie horror genre, I think you may like this movie.  The Movie Man gives it 3.5 out of 5 stars.  

Please click the link and give my Facebook page a like.   https://www.facebook.com/reviewsmovieman/timeline

SINISTER 2 MOVIE REVIEW

It is important to note that Sinister 2 begins right where the first movie left off.  If you haven’t seen the first one you will be pretty lost for a good portion of this film.  I have seen the original multiple times and I was a little lost myself.  That is an entirely different issue, however. 

 

                This movie centers around a single mother (Shannyn Sossamon) and her twin boys (played by real life twins Dartanian and Robert Daniel Sloan) who move into an old farmhouse where a gruesome murder took place years ago.  Ex-Deputy So & So (James Ransone) stumbles upon the family as he is investigating the strange occurrences surrounding the death of the writer Ellison Oswalt and his family.

                The thing that made the first movie work so well was that the family drama that set the backdrop for all the scary stuff really worked.  You cared about the family and what happened to them.  This movie tries to do the same thing except this time it doesn’t work nearly as well.  I personally didn’t care about the characters at all which took the tension out of the film.  The whole thing feels quite contrived.  It feels like just what it is; a device by which to inject the scares into the film.  Also, with the mystery of Bughuul no longer intact, the film is far less interesting.  They tried to take a different approach to the story which I respect, but it just didn’t work for me. 

 

                The acting in the film leaves a lot to be desired.  Shannyn Sossamon is ok, but I’ve always thought she was overrated.  James Ransone was good in a supporting role in Sinister but he is not leading man material.  All of the supporting actors were bad except for Lea Coco, who played the villainous husband, pulling strings to get back custody of his sons.  Although Coco did a pretty good job, his character was flat and unrealistic. 

                The star of the first movie was, without a doubt, the 8mm footage.  These scenes provided some of the most disturbing imagery I have ever seen in a movie.  That is one thing that this sequel got right.  It is true that these scenes are more elaborate and contrived than in the first movie but I think they had to be that way in order to live up to what was expected here.  They certainly exceeded my expectations in this area.  While I would agree that these segments don’t have the same unexpected emotional punch that they did in the first movie (which is not entirely the fault of the movie), I would say that these are more disturbing overall. 

 

                Ciaran Foy (Citadel) did not impress me as the director of this film.  There was too much shaky cam stuff.  One scene in the climax of the movie is really hard to watch because of the camera work.  There was also a lot of stupid things happening that would never happen in real life.  It felt like this movie took a lot of shortcuts.  The ending of the movie is overly convoluted with way too much going on, most of which makes no sense. 

                This movie is nowhere near as good as the first Sinister.  It’s not laughably bad, but it is not good either.  If this is your genre, as it is mine, it might be worth seeing when it comes out in Redbox.  I wouldn’t advise paying theater prices to see it.  I hoped for more from this, but ultimately got about what I expected.  The Movie Man gives it 2.5 out of 5 stars. 

 

Please click the link and give my Facebook page a like. https://www.facebook.com/reviewsmovieman?ref=aymt_homepage_panel

               

THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E. MOVIE REVIEW

There was one thing about The Man from U.N.C.L.E. that absolutely made it stand apart from other movies of it's kind.  Just one aspect of the film made it ascend from potential mediocrity into true epicness.  This film actually gave us, wait for it………….THE LONE RANGER vs. SUPERMAN!  And as if that wasn’t enough, it then gave us The Lone Ranger and Superman teaming up!  Get it?  Because it’s Armie Hammer and Henry Cavill?  They played The Lone Ranger and Sup……..nevermind. 

 

                The plot of this movie is very simple.  The Nazis have a nuclear bomb and the US and Russia must team up in order to stop them.  That’s about it.  I’m not saying that’s a bad thing.  It allowed the film to focus on execution and avoid being convoluted, which is a problem that generally haunts this genre.  The simple plot made the movie easy to watch and put more pressure on the filmmakers and actors to actually come through. 

                Guy Ritchie (Snatch, Sherlock Holmes) did a very good job with this film.  It is stylistic in a way that did not interfere with the film, which I liked.  The movie is not bloated with action scenes, which is usually what happens with a simple plot like this.  The editing is sensational.  The jump cuts, flashbacks, and split screens all really worked for me.  The score of the film is fantastic as well.  A lot of the music reminded me of stuff from the legendary Ennio Morricone in The Man with No Name trilogy.  That fun, “the showdown is about to happen” type of music really added a lot to the movie. 

 

                The standout performance of this movie comes from Henry Cavill (Man of Steel).  He played a stereotypical suave American spy.  His character was pretty much American James Bond.  Cavill brought a good bit of genuine humor to the film and overacted in all the best ways.  Alicia Vikander (Ex Machina) and Armie Hammer (The Lone Ranger) are also very good in the film.  I have never been a fan of Hammer but this is the best performance I have ever seen from him.  This character fit him like a glove.  Hugh Grant is also in the movie and was good in the limited time he was actually given in the film. 

                The chemistry between the three main actors is very good, which is a key to the success of the film.  The majority of the movie is based on the relationship between these three characters.  This was the most intriguing aspect of the film to me.  There was constant simultaneous friction and bonding between the characters that kept the film fun and interesting all the way through. 

                There were a few stupid scenes in the movie, which fit with the light tone to some degree.  Still, there were a few scenes that I just couldn’t buy.  I would have liked for Hammer’s character to have been explained a little more.  Cavill’s character had good exposition and backstory.  His counterpart needed the same treatment.  There is a twist or two in the movie that you will see coming a mile away.  Nothing will surprise you here.  The execution is still very good and I didn’t mind the predictability at all, but if you are the type that wants to be stumped, this is not going to work for you. 

 

                In what has been dubbed the year of the spy movie, I would say that The Man from U.N.C.L.E. is probably the best one so far.  It is light and fun, which is refreshing to me in an era when all these kind of movies seem to think they have to be darker and more convoluted than the one before.  I had a very good time with this film and might go as far as to say it is Guy Ritchie’s best movie to date.  The Movie Man gives it 4 out of 5 stars. 

 

Please click the link and give my Facebook page a like.  https://www.facebook.com/reviewsmovieman?ref=aymt_homepage_panel

FANTASTIC FOUR MOVIE REVIEW

In 2005 a movie came out called Batman Begins.  It was a very good film, but by the title and trailers it was easy to see that this was not going to be another typical Batman movie.  It was obviously going to be an in-depth film about the origin of Batman.  The first problem with Fantastic Four is that it is predominately that same type of film although it was marketed as being a straight comic book movie.  This movie is about how the Fantastic Four became the Fantastic Four.  If you are expecting to see the typical super heroes fighting the bad guys film, you’re not going to get very much of that at all. 

 

                Like I said before, this is an origin story, almost exclusively.  This is about the genius Reed Richards and how he develops the teleportation machine that leads to the members of the Fantastic Four acquiring their powers.  Reed along with Sue and Johnny Storm, Ben Grimm, and Victor Von Doom build the machine that transports them into another dimension.  When they come back however, there are complications. 

                This movie actually had some potential.  Aside from an incredibly stupid opening sequence, the first act is not that bad.  The characters are actually established well and I was getting a little bit invested in the outcome.  It’s not until the second act that things start to go awry.  And when it starts to come apart, it really comes apart fast. 

 

                One thing this film had going for it from the very beginning was a very good cast.  Miles Teller (Whiplash) and Kate Mara (127 Hours) had good performances in the film despite serious problems.  Michael B. Jordan (Chronicle) has been very good in the past but, with the hideous dialogue he was given in this film, he never had a chance.  The director of this film is Josh Trank (Chronicle).  He has done good work before but it is hard to say how much of this mess is his fault.  He sent out a Tweet recently basically washing his hands of the film.  That is never a good sign.  In Trank’s defense, it appears to me to be a classic case of studio meddling.  I believe the studio had one idea for the film and Trank had another.  What we ended up getting was a jumbled combination of both. 

                One thing you don’t expect to have in a big budget film today is bad effects.  However, that is exactly what this movie gave us.  The CGI effects look like something out of Son of the Mask.  Doctor Doom’s appearance would be laughable if it wasn’t appalling.   He looks plastic.  Even the green screen effects, which is pretty old technology, looks absolutely horrible.  All of the scenes that are done in the alternate dimension just take you completely out of the film because the green screen is so obvious.  There is absolutely no excuse for this in a film that had this much money behind it in 2015.  It is nothing but laziness out of the filmmakers and an obvious lack of concern for their paying customers. 

 

                To say that this movie fell apart in the third act is an understatement.  This could honestly be the worst third act I have ever seen in a movie.  It’s fast, cheap, and makes no attempt at accomplishing anything substantial.  The final fight scene is a joke.  The distinct lack of effort was very apparent here. 

                As bad as this film is, and it is VERY bad, these filmmakers actually had the audacity to set up a sequel and, dare I say, a franchise.  They actually think we want to see more of this.  Hopefully this movie will perform poorly enough to keep that from happening.  What I’m saying is, this movie is truly terrible and does not deserve your money nor one more word from me.  The Movie Man gives it 1 out of 5 stars.               

Please click the link and give my Facebook page a like.  https://www.facebook.com/reviewsmovieman?ref=aymt_homepage_panel

MR. HOLMES MOVIE REVIEW

“When legend becomes fact, print the legend.”  That is my favorite line from the movie The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.  It is also, in a way, the main premise of Mr. Holmes.  This movie shows the “real” Holmes.  Not the one we have all read stories about; stories that Holmes says were very much embellished by Dr. Watson.  It is refreshing to see the classic story approached from this original angle.     

 

                This movie employs a technique that I have seen used several times this year; parallel storytelling.  There are three different stories being told at once that encompass three different periods in Holmes’ life.  The somewhat unreliable narrator taking us on this journey is a 92 year old Sherlock Holmes who is suffering from senility….and probably Alzheimer’s by the looks of things.  He is trying to remember events from his life so that he can write them the way that they really happened.  The one thing he is sure of is that they didn’t occur the way people think they did. 

                The plot of this film is very intriguing and much more involved than I thought it would be.  Screenwriter Jeffrey Hatcher and director Bill Condon (Twilight: Breaking Dawn, Dreamgirls) did a very good job with this film.  The parallel storytelling is well organized and to the point.  The plot moves slowly but steadily and there is no wasted time.  The movie can feel a bit long at times but I wouldn’t say that it drags or anything like that.  This film is an investment.  It will take time and thought to get anything out of it.  The characters are very good, which is what truly gets you invested in the film on an emotional level.  As I said before, this is a very intriguing story; impressively so. 

 

                Ian McKellen is a legend and there is never any doubt that he is going to have a good performance in whatever movie he is in.  That being said, it is no surprise that this is one of my favorite performances of the year.  He plays Holmes at two different ages that are thirty years apart and is very convincing at both.  McKellen has some truly great dialogue and, while he plays a different Holmes than we are familiar with, he is exactly as one might expect a great detective to be.  McKellen’s performance is most impressive when he is struggling to remember something that happened in the past, showing us an emotional combination of frustration and helplessness. 

                The ending of the movie is highly intense.   Something happens at the end that seemed completely unnecessary to me at the time, but the way it played out showed me how wrong I was.  Just when it seemed like the movie should be wrapping up, it takes an unexpected turn that really pays off in the last five or ten minutes.  This ending is highly metaphorical, filled with symbolism, and is exactly what this film needed. 

 

                Mr. Holmes is a very good film.  It is not a casual, date night type of movie.  This is a film that is very emotional and thought provoking.  It has a lot of story to it but avoids getting convoluted.  Great performances by the cast, including a legendary outing from Ian McKellen, is what puts this film in a different league.  The Movie Man gives it 4.5 out of 5 stars. 

 

Please click the link and give my Facebook page a like.  https://www.facebook.com/reviewsmovieman?ref=aymt_homepage_panel

THE GIFT MOVIE REVIEW

I’m going to start off this review with the most important thing I can tell you.  If you haven’t already, DO NOT watch a trailer for this film.  If you watched it on my Facebook page, I apologize.  I also would avoid all reviews for this film, except this one of course.  The trailers and reviews are all giving away one very important aspect of the film that should be a big surprise.  I’m obviously not going to spoil that here, but for some reason everybody else is. 

 

                This movie is about an ambitious businessman named Simon (Jason Bateman) and his wife Robyn (Rebecca Hall) who move back to the area where Simon grew up after several years away.  Soon after the move, they encounter Gordon, a man from Simon’s past.  When Gordo starts to come on a little too strong, Simon decides it is time to set some boundaries.   That’s all I’m going to say because that is all you need to know about this movie right now. 

                The story of this film is Joel Edgerton.  Not only does he deliver a terrific performance as Gordo, one of the best of his career in fact, this is also his writer/director debut.  You wouldn’t know it. This is a very well-directed film.  I honestly can’t think of a more technically sound directing debut.  Although methodical, this is a very well-paced film that took a lot of discipline to handle correctly.  It is totally psychological and the subtle interactions between the characters are expertly captured by Edgerton.  He does a fantastic job of showing characters reactions to dialogue.  Instead of focusing on the character delivering the dialogue, he focuses instead on the faces of the characters reacting to it.  That technique is very effective in a psychological thriller like this.  I was very impressed by this directorial debut.  The screenplay is also very good and focused.  It stays within itself and never tries to do too much. 

 

                The tension in the film relies on the interactions between the three main characters.   The tension is there because the relationships between the characters absolutely work.  They seem like real people.  While part of the credit has to go to the screenplay for creating these characters, the most important aspect of this in my opinion, is some very fine acting.  Jason Bateman is great in this film.  I usually do not like him, but this is by far the best performance of his career.  Rebecca Hall is wonderful as the only somewhat grounded character in the film.  Great acting and characters are so important in a film like this and The Gift has both in spades. 

                If I’m really nitpicking this movie, and I have to if I’m gonna find very many flaws to talk about, I could have shaved a few minutes off of the runtime in unnecessary scenes.  Things like showing characters brushing their teeth or exercising didn’t seem to serve much purpose in moving the plot along.  Also, the creepy, “is somebody in the dark hallway”, type scenes got a little repetitive at a certain point.  These are small issues in a very good film, but they are issues none the less. 

 

                The ending of the movie was almost great.  The problem that held it back was that it was too deliberate.  The whole film had been very ambiguous and then a deliberate ending took me out of the movie a little bit.  Don’t get me wrong, the ending was very effective.  I just didn’t totally buy it completely. 

                The Gift is everything I hoped it would be and more.  It is a very impressive writer/director debut for Joel Edgerton.  It is a film that had a lot of effort and care put into it and that is something that I value a great deal.  If you like psychological thrillers, this is the one.  Along with Ex Machina, this is one of the most thought provoking films of the year.  The Movie Man gives it 4 out of 5 stars. 

 

Please click the link and give my Facebook page a like.  https://www.facebook.com/reviewsmovieman?ref=aymt_homepage_panel