This was completely mis-marketed, most likely due to the commercial success of the enjoyable Daddy's Home films starring Wahlberg also written and directed by Sean Anders. This is one of those unfortunate circumstances where star power overwhelmed a films campaign I felt, yet in a catch 22 scenario the film may not have been made without said star. Thus I fear it will be one of those films that never finds the audience it deserves. Instant Family is an extremely solid film about adoption told through a relatively mainstream format. I personally enjoyed it immensely, I went in knowing very little about the film and was expecting something fairly disposable but fun from the way it was marketed. I did not expect the last 20 minutes to have me tearing up as much as it did and the film in general to have had as much of a hold as it did from the outset. I am not someone that has had direct experience of adoption, but I have learnt about the experiences of it through a loved one, and I feel the film is very faithful as much as any 2 hr film intended for a mass audience could be. There are quite a few excellent stand up comedians in supporting roles, as well as Octavia Spencer, and a great cameo towards the end that I won't spoil. There isn't a single bum note within the cast. Wahlberg to me is our next Tom Cruise, it's easy to mock him or cast him aside, but the fact is he never fails to deliver as a performer despite the material. But this film is a great vehicle to display his dramatic and comedic abilities, but his casting is unfortunately going to be the reason why this film may never reach its intended audience, which is a real shame because this is a very touching, enjoyable and relatable film that I hopes finds its audience post theatrical release. And huge kudos to the young cast members in the film and to those who may have helped them find and present their inner expressions, great work all round!
Reviews
12 Reviews
Destination Wedding
(2018)
The kind of film you don't want to stop
8 December 2018
I debated watching the film as it had two really well known actors and the first I heard of it was seeing it appear on iTunes, though I'm learning these days that's how you either watch something really great or something that just couldn't get theatrical traction. It can be hard to tell. If you're like me and want to watch a really nice rom com with a nice visual backdrop and something that speaks to you, then I'll ask you the following question(s). Do you really enjoy watching either of these actors in general, and do you enjoy great dialogue? If the answer is yes, read no further, watch this film.
This is a straight up two hander, there are no other speaking characters, which is why I suspect some of the lower ratings. It's not your typical romcom, with your supporting characters and traditional B Story. It pretty much is a stage play but told through film. Ryder and Reeves have such genuine and great chemistry together and the writing and deptiction of the characters is so perfect at the 25 minute mark there was a little moment that I won't ruin, but I just knew this was going to be one of those films and stories I could watch for hours.
I think my favorite thing about the film beyond the familiarities I could personally relate to was seeing Reeves perform in a role so different than his typical casting and to pull it off so well, many consider him at times to be a wooden actor, but he's never been a bad actor by any stretch, but here he really gets a chance to shine and show something we haven't seen from him before. I think it helped acting alongside the great Winona Ryder who in my eyes can never fail, she's always sublime, but their pairing in this is just almost magical. It's hard not to ruin things, all I'll say is there was a scene in particular that normally could have come off as trite, but it made me laugh so hard.
I would give this film a 10 if it was half an hour longer, which seems like the worst backhanded compliment ever, the film is genuinely as long as it needs to be, the pacing is perfect. But the writer/director and actors created such a great pair I genuinely wanted more. Yes it made me miss my previous relationship, yes it made me think about the potential of a future one, and ultimately it made me feel warm inside. What else could a romantic comedy hope to achieve?
This is a straight up two hander, there are no other speaking characters, which is why I suspect some of the lower ratings. It's not your typical romcom, with your supporting characters and traditional B Story. It pretty much is a stage play but told through film. Ryder and Reeves have such genuine and great chemistry together and the writing and deptiction of the characters is so perfect at the 25 minute mark there was a little moment that I won't ruin, but I just knew this was going to be one of those films and stories I could watch for hours.
I think my favorite thing about the film beyond the familiarities I could personally relate to was seeing Reeves perform in a role so different than his typical casting and to pull it off so well, many consider him at times to be a wooden actor, but he's never been a bad actor by any stretch, but here he really gets a chance to shine and show something we haven't seen from him before. I think it helped acting alongside the great Winona Ryder who in my eyes can never fail, she's always sublime, but their pairing in this is just almost magical. It's hard not to ruin things, all I'll say is there was a scene in particular that normally could have come off as trite, but it made me laugh so hard.
I would give this film a 10 if it was half an hour longer, which seems like the worst backhanded compliment ever, the film is genuinely as long as it needs to be, the pacing is perfect. But the writer/director and actors created such a great pair I genuinely wanted more. Yes it made me miss my previous relationship, yes it made me think about the potential of a future one, and ultimately it made me feel warm inside. What else could a romantic comedy hope to achieve?
Truly brilliant
28 July 2018
I tend not to write reviews here for films that kind of don't need them, for example if a film is something I feel is under or over rated, I'll review, or if something just really completely irks me I'll review. I rarely if ever review something that is really good, and critically well received. So why am I reviewing MI6? Because it was just that good, and I can't think of a single visual franchise with the, whether it be books, or games that tops itself in it's 6th iteration. Fair enough, you could argue, the MI films are about spectacle rather than character, so much like James Bond, it's not hard to repeat and improve.
I would argue however, that especially in today's wealth of excellent media available to us, that such a feat really isn't that straightforward, and that MI6 is somewhat of a marvel. And it's star is someone who is not without controversy. Maybe not the damning controversy of many others in the industry, but I know people who just can't ignore the fact he is a scientologist.
Frankly I've never cared, because he's such a good actor, unlike others, you never see him give anything less than 120%, and that's personally all I need to know. And in this film he literally brakes bones and bleeds for the audience, and the guy is in his 50's. There's a almost primitive and macabre nature to his performance in MI6, akin to Chaplin, Keaton and Chan. It's easy to ignore just what he's doing and assume we're watching CGI trickery, for sure there's countless safety measures in place and clever VFX, but still, I cannot commend the man enough for his physical performance in this film, it's simply breathtaking.
That alone could be enough to deem the film worthy in it's own right. But then, you get bonus upon bonus, a truly outstanding action thriller script by McQuarrie, and virtually faultless direction. Everything in this film is on point, the pacing is near perfect, with the action, save for one main chase scene, always pushing the story along, leading up to one of the best finales I can think of seeing in recent memory.
The only real flaw I can point out is that some of the supporting characters get somewhat relegated by the 3rd act, as a result of needing to appease too many pre-existing storylines from previous films, but it was a tricky puzzle to solve for a writer/director coming into a franchise after 4 films, where the main character is meant to be a vehicle, a tool if you will, rather than be a character weighed down with too much. It's a fine balance to tread. But in today's world it's not enough to merely have an action lead like Bond, who has zero backstory and zero personal stakes, beyond saving the world and saving the girl. McQuarrie, Cruise, Abrams and co have done a very good job of taking the character beyond his first 2 iterations. (For the record I HATE MI2, it's just dumb AF).
I may need to watch it again to appreciate any flaws or shortcomings, but from the initial viewing, and from someone who went in expecting a lot, I have to say I was not disappointed in the least, along with Avengers Infinity War, this was a sequel and major tentpole film that exceeded and delivered on my expectations. Something I haven't been able to say for some time when it comes to huge budget films.
This is most definitely a film you HAVE to see in theaters, if anything for the genuine rollercoaster that is the last 20 minutes. If you like action/thriller/espionage films and aren't overly concerned about absolute realism, and appreciate that films can be an escape and sometime tool for fantasy and imagination, then you will completely adore this film.
I would argue however, that especially in today's wealth of excellent media available to us, that such a feat really isn't that straightforward, and that MI6 is somewhat of a marvel. And it's star is someone who is not without controversy. Maybe not the damning controversy of many others in the industry, but I know people who just can't ignore the fact he is a scientologist.
Frankly I've never cared, because he's such a good actor, unlike others, you never see him give anything less than 120%, and that's personally all I need to know. And in this film he literally brakes bones and bleeds for the audience, and the guy is in his 50's. There's a almost primitive and macabre nature to his performance in MI6, akin to Chaplin, Keaton and Chan. It's easy to ignore just what he's doing and assume we're watching CGI trickery, for sure there's countless safety measures in place and clever VFX, but still, I cannot commend the man enough for his physical performance in this film, it's simply breathtaking.
That alone could be enough to deem the film worthy in it's own right. But then, you get bonus upon bonus, a truly outstanding action thriller script by McQuarrie, and virtually faultless direction. Everything in this film is on point, the pacing is near perfect, with the action, save for one main chase scene, always pushing the story along, leading up to one of the best finales I can think of seeing in recent memory.
The only real flaw I can point out is that some of the supporting characters get somewhat relegated by the 3rd act, as a result of needing to appease too many pre-existing storylines from previous films, but it was a tricky puzzle to solve for a writer/director coming into a franchise after 4 films, where the main character is meant to be a vehicle, a tool if you will, rather than be a character weighed down with too much. It's a fine balance to tread. But in today's world it's not enough to merely have an action lead like Bond, who has zero backstory and zero personal stakes, beyond saving the world and saving the girl. McQuarrie, Cruise, Abrams and co have done a very good job of taking the character beyond his first 2 iterations. (For the record I HATE MI2, it's just dumb AF).
I may need to watch it again to appreciate any flaws or shortcomings, but from the initial viewing, and from someone who went in expecting a lot, I have to say I was not disappointed in the least, along with Avengers Infinity War, this was a sequel and major tentpole film that exceeded and delivered on my expectations. Something I haven't been able to say for some time when it comes to huge budget films.
This is most definitely a film you HAVE to see in theaters, if anything for the genuine rollercoaster that is the last 20 minutes. If you like action/thriller/espionage films and aren't overly concerned about absolute realism, and appreciate that films can be an escape and sometime tool for fantasy and imagination, then you will completely adore this film.
Super Troopers 2
(2018)
I'm sorry...
18 July 2018
Huge fan of the original. And a relative fan of the Broken Lizard guys in general though I can't admit to being a superfan of any kind, I have always admired them, even when they weren't hitting their best. But this was a true disappointment on almost all levels. It really doesn't take a lot for me to enjoy a comedy, I can watch high brow and extremely low brow and still be entertained, but I can't quite tell if 'Super Troopers 2' is the worst film I've seen this year or whether nostalgia is preventing me from just admitting that outright.
I saw the positive reviews and hoped that like most comedies the low rotten tomatoes rating and so forth were just from those that watched a couple of movies a month and were a bit more discerning with their time and money, either it kills or it doesn't. But after seeing the film I can only surmise the positive reviews to be from those that either funded the film through indiegogo or are die hard fans. Or maybe I just outgrew or changed my sense of humor since I watched a Broken Lizard film. I don't know though, I still love silly, I still love non-PC comedy, I still love fart jokes and banality. But there was barely a handful of moments here that made me raise a smile.
I hoped maybe at least the story or something would shine through and offer a glimpse of something that would make me care, but nope. I'm trying to think of a positive, I've rarely scored a film this low, and if I have I would never have written a review for it, but am only doing so in this case, because of the genuine disappointment I am feeling. If it takes crowdfunding to make a sequel, there's probably a hint there tha the film isn't going to be good. Sure, we want the underdog to succeed, of course we do. But this is something that didn't get funding before, and for a reason. Broken Lizard were a bunch of young guys that were successful being juvenile, but they literally grew up, and you could see that with each of their successive projects. A decade gap wasn't going to help.
What could have worked was getting some talented young fans to write and maybe even direct the sequel, because the cast is still there, and have seemingly barely aged a day or lost any of their charisma and chemistry. It's just the material.. very poor material.
I'm sorry guys, I really wanted to like this, and I really wasn't expecting much. I just couldn't believe how poor the film was though.
I saw the positive reviews and hoped that like most comedies the low rotten tomatoes rating and so forth were just from those that watched a couple of movies a month and were a bit more discerning with their time and money, either it kills or it doesn't. But after seeing the film I can only surmise the positive reviews to be from those that either funded the film through indiegogo or are die hard fans. Or maybe I just outgrew or changed my sense of humor since I watched a Broken Lizard film. I don't know though, I still love silly, I still love non-PC comedy, I still love fart jokes and banality. But there was barely a handful of moments here that made me raise a smile.
I hoped maybe at least the story or something would shine through and offer a glimpse of something that would make me care, but nope. I'm trying to think of a positive, I've rarely scored a film this low, and if I have I would never have written a review for it, but am only doing so in this case, because of the genuine disappointment I am feeling. If it takes crowdfunding to make a sequel, there's probably a hint there tha the film isn't going to be good. Sure, we want the underdog to succeed, of course we do. But this is something that didn't get funding before, and for a reason. Broken Lizard were a bunch of young guys that were successful being juvenile, but they literally grew up, and you could see that with each of their successive projects. A decade gap wasn't going to help.
What could have worked was getting some talented young fans to write and maybe even direct the sequel, because the cast is still there, and have seemingly barely aged a day or lost any of their charisma and chemistry. It's just the material.. very poor material.
I'm sorry guys, I really wanted to like this, and I really wasn't expecting much. I just couldn't believe how poor the film was though.
The Accountant
(2016)
A hidden gem?
13 July 2018
I completely wrote this film off when it came out in theaters 2 years ago, maybe it was the title, not exactly the most enticing of occupations, I don't even remember watching a trailer, and I never heard anyone talk about it or hearing much fanfare, so just assumed it was something Affleck was contractually obliged to do by WB while bulking up for Batman and churn something out in the interim. So I ignored it.
Cut to today where I'm kind of on some serious downtime coupled with a 4K iTunes binge slash addiction, and catching up on those films I missed out on. I read the reviews and they were extremely positive, I'm a fan of Affleck in general, he's simply a likeable lead even when he's miscast or not quite hitting it, he's just watchable. I used to dislike Anna Kendrick, but became a total convert after Pitch Perfect. And who doesn't love JK Simmons? Seemed like giving the film a shot was a no brainer.
The film has some rough edges, and at times it balances that line of feeling smarter than it really is, and I'm sure there are some plot holes that may appear on a repeated view, but I wouldn't know or care right now because I was completely caught up in the film and enjoyed it immensely. It may not have the immediacy of 'Taken', but in terms of being that smart action thriller you don't expect, I would liken it to that.
The 3rd act and climax is really great, the film, the subplots and the lead character in general completely begin to gel in a very satisfactory way. I really enjoyed the film. I'd compare it to 'John Wick', less over the top, but it has a similar tone and feel in regards to a stoic lead, excellent action choreography, a considered sense of humor and likeable characters. if you liked those films you will definitely get a kick out of 'The Accountant'. A solid script, solid performances, solid everything. A truly solid 8/10.
Cut to today where I'm kind of on some serious downtime coupled with a 4K iTunes binge slash addiction, and catching up on those films I missed out on. I read the reviews and they were extremely positive, I'm a fan of Affleck in general, he's simply a likeable lead even when he's miscast or not quite hitting it, he's just watchable. I used to dislike Anna Kendrick, but became a total convert after Pitch Perfect. And who doesn't love JK Simmons? Seemed like giving the film a shot was a no brainer.
The film has some rough edges, and at times it balances that line of feeling smarter than it really is, and I'm sure there are some plot holes that may appear on a repeated view, but I wouldn't know or care right now because I was completely caught up in the film and enjoyed it immensely. It may not have the immediacy of 'Taken', but in terms of being that smart action thriller you don't expect, I would liken it to that.
The 3rd act and climax is really great, the film, the subplots and the lead character in general completely begin to gel in a very satisfactory way. I really enjoyed the film. I'd compare it to 'John Wick', less over the top, but it has a similar tone and feel in regards to a stoic lead, excellent action choreography, a considered sense of humor and likeable characters. if you liked those films you will definitely get a kick out of 'The Accountant'. A solid script, solid performances, solid everything. A truly solid 8/10.
Honestly not that bad, fun lazy afternoon movie
2 July 2018
I'm not a huge transformers fan, but I don't dislike the series either, they have there moments, and the first was a genuinely fun comedy more than anything. I did however give up on the series midway during Age of Extinction, there was a point where it felt like everyone except for the brilliant technicians just gave up. It just became really silly. Cut to today where I wanted to turn my brain off and watch something pretty to look at, and having seemingly run out of films to see, and noticing a 4K version of the film was available on demand, and decided to just see what happened.
Maybe because I had such low expectations, but I went away satisfied. The film started real lazy, you could almost sense Michael Bay sleeping in his director's chair, as the rest of the team just took care of things. It did get better about a good half hour in though. My biggest complaint is scenes don't transition well, and the constantly changing aspect ratio, I get why Nolan does it, but I have never liked it, in fact I hate it. The reasoning is so that the viewer gets the full resolution, nothing is compromised, but to me so much is compromised, it is jarring and just reminds you that you are watching something technical and man made, rather than allowing the viewer to truly escape. Nolan's films dont' have the brisk editing pace of Bay's films however, so it's not as jarring, and usually the ratio will change for a whole scene, rather than keep cutting back and forth, but in Transformers, it feels like 5 different formats are used within one quick scene or montage, it's really too much. I'd much rather have just seen the film on TV, where they would have been one consistent ratio and sacrifice the picture quality.
Besides this, the film was fun, Laura Haddock had a good rapport with Wahlberg, helping the 2nd half of the film keep some momentum. And it's the 2nd half I personally enjoyed the most, the story kicks in, and it's just fun, big and loud, and not overly silly or ridiculous. I was able to throw myself in for the ride and not be taken out by some idiotic dialogue or over the top illogical action scene. I was able to be a 10 year old kid again and just have fun. It's not a 1/10 film, it's not even a 3/10. It's just a solid film, I was most surprised with how big budget it was considering it's the 5th in the series, but it's turned a good profit worldwide, becuase it knows it's audience. They want to have some laughs, and see robots explode the crap out of stuff.
Maybe because I had such low expectations, but I went away satisfied. The film started real lazy, you could almost sense Michael Bay sleeping in his director's chair, as the rest of the team just took care of things. It did get better about a good half hour in though. My biggest complaint is scenes don't transition well, and the constantly changing aspect ratio, I get why Nolan does it, but I have never liked it, in fact I hate it. The reasoning is so that the viewer gets the full resolution, nothing is compromised, but to me so much is compromised, it is jarring and just reminds you that you are watching something technical and man made, rather than allowing the viewer to truly escape. Nolan's films dont' have the brisk editing pace of Bay's films however, so it's not as jarring, and usually the ratio will change for a whole scene, rather than keep cutting back and forth, but in Transformers, it feels like 5 different formats are used within one quick scene or montage, it's really too much. I'd much rather have just seen the film on TV, where they would have been one consistent ratio and sacrifice the picture quality.
Besides this, the film was fun, Laura Haddock had a good rapport with Wahlberg, helping the 2nd half of the film keep some momentum. And it's the 2nd half I personally enjoyed the most, the story kicks in, and it's just fun, big and loud, and not overly silly or ridiculous. I was able to throw myself in for the ride and not be taken out by some idiotic dialogue or over the top illogical action scene. I was able to be a 10 year old kid again and just have fun. It's not a 1/10 film, it's not even a 3/10. It's just a solid film, I was most surprised with how big budget it was considering it's the 5th in the series, but it's turned a good profit worldwide, becuase it knows it's audience. They want to have some laughs, and see robots explode the crap out of stuff.
The Intern
(I) (2015)
On of the best feel good movies for some time.
31 May 2016
Very rarely do I want a film to be a good hour or two longer, I could spend a whole season and more with Ben and Jules. On the surface it looks like this is going to be an odd romcom vehicle for Hathaway and Dr Niro, but don't let that notion put you off, mainly because it isn't really a romcom, yes there are romances in the film, and this really isn't a spoiler, but ultimately it's a film about a man and woman becoming friends, which is kind of a rare thing in a big budget Hollywood film.
Like many others, I find something kind of annoying about Anne Hathaway, but this was by far my favorite performance from her, I actually started to really like her in this, she was cast perfectly, as was De Niro, the film is a nice reminder of just how strong a character actor he can be and why he's regarded as the best, and Myers has probably created literally the most like-able character ever with Ben, if you don't fall in love with him, then you're a straight up monster.
For me The Intern is a near perfect film, I rarely give 10/10 to anything. Yes it may not be groundbreaking, but in some ways the film is, it eschews the typical expectations from a big budget film like this, and I think only someone like Myers is in a position to do a film like this. At the end of the day, it's literally what a feel good film is, you like all the characters, there isn't a typical antagonist, at least not in human form.
The only real criticism I can give is the casting of Anders Holm, who is a fine dramatic and comedic actor, that anyone who watches Workaholics will adore, but something just didn't feel right with his casting here, maybe it's just that I don't buy him and Anne Hathaway together, despite the fact he kind of looks like her real life husband. It's a slight mis-step to me, and maybe he wasn't the first choice, maybe he got the role after Adam Devine got cast, or vice versa. But it's a very small criticism, because he does the role well, and it hardly detracts from the film as a whole.
Get a bottle of wine, and enjoy!
Like many others, I find something kind of annoying about Anne Hathaway, but this was by far my favorite performance from her, I actually started to really like her in this, she was cast perfectly, as was De Niro, the film is a nice reminder of just how strong a character actor he can be and why he's regarded as the best, and Myers has probably created literally the most like-able character ever with Ben, if you don't fall in love with him, then you're a straight up monster.
For me The Intern is a near perfect film, I rarely give 10/10 to anything. Yes it may not be groundbreaking, but in some ways the film is, it eschews the typical expectations from a big budget film like this, and I think only someone like Myers is in a position to do a film like this. At the end of the day, it's literally what a feel good film is, you like all the characters, there isn't a typical antagonist, at least not in human form.
The only real criticism I can give is the casting of Anders Holm, who is a fine dramatic and comedic actor, that anyone who watches Workaholics will adore, but something just didn't feel right with his casting here, maybe it's just that I don't buy him and Anne Hathaway together, despite the fact he kind of looks like her real life husband. It's a slight mis-step to me, and maybe he wasn't the first choice, maybe he got the role after Adam Devine got cast, or vice versa. But it's a very small criticism, because he does the role well, and it hardly detracts from the film as a whole.
Get a bottle of wine, and enjoy!
Never read the books, I really liked the movie!
9 February 2016
The first Maze Runner was for me the saving grace of the first generation of YA films, Wes Ball did a magnificent job of making a first class action adventure for a relatively low budget. It was entertaining, and at time thought provoking, and full of fantastic performances from a young cast. The mystery of being in the glades really added to the film and wondering what was behind the maze. There were only a couple of cliché moments, otherwise I was a massive fan of it.
When the sequel came out, all I heard was negativity, and some of the harshest comments i've heard for a film. I feared the first film was a fluke, and that the sequel would be like other YA films, massive budget and brilliant production design, but completely lacking in solid story telling. I avoided the film for a long time, until tonight when I was in the mood for a big budget visual film.
I have to say I can't understand the negativity geared towards the film at all, I thought the sequel was a truly well made action adventure, one of the best I've seen in a long time, and trust me I watch a LOT of films. Yes there are again a few cliché moments, that make you question the characters, otherwise it really is a truly entertaining film, with some of the better action scenes I've seen this year. And there needs to be some genuine applause and adulation for the Production Designer, the sets and production value is truly amazing.
I'm 34 years old, I hate stupid films with lazy writing and directing. This film has none of that, i think I enjoyed it more than more or less all the other big tent pole films of 2015. I don't care about whether the source material wasn't copied or seemingly respected, this is a film version of the book, I really can't comment on whether or not the adaption should have been closer to the source, all I know is that I thought the film was a great example of the Hollywood blockbuster.
I think in many ways I actually thought it succeeded the first movie, if for any other reason, that for the roller-coaster ride it offers.
When the sequel came out, all I heard was negativity, and some of the harshest comments i've heard for a film. I feared the first film was a fluke, and that the sequel would be like other YA films, massive budget and brilliant production design, but completely lacking in solid story telling. I avoided the film for a long time, until tonight when I was in the mood for a big budget visual film.
I have to say I can't understand the negativity geared towards the film at all, I thought the sequel was a truly well made action adventure, one of the best I've seen in a long time, and trust me I watch a LOT of films. Yes there are again a few cliché moments, that make you question the characters, otherwise it really is a truly entertaining film, with some of the better action scenes I've seen this year. And there needs to be some genuine applause and adulation for the Production Designer, the sets and production value is truly amazing.
I'm 34 years old, I hate stupid films with lazy writing and directing. This film has none of that, i think I enjoyed it more than more or less all the other big tent pole films of 2015. I don't care about whether the source material wasn't copied or seemingly respected, this is a film version of the book, I really can't comment on whether or not the adaption should have been closer to the source, all I know is that I thought the film was a great example of the Hollywood blockbuster.
I think in many ways I actually thought it succeeded the first movie, if for any other reason, that for the roller-coaster ride it offers.
Taken 3
(2014)
Embarrassing mess of a Film
5 April 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Before anyone says, it's Taken 3, what do you expect? I expect people who make millions of dollars as supposed storytelling to perform the fundamentals of basic storytelling, that's what I expect.
I remember Taken 2 being disappointing, but I don't remember it being as bad as Taken 3, a film that is full of nonsensical moments. From the opening scenes, you just know the screenplay was written by Besson & Kamen over a weekend in their Beverly Hills mansion, and by the closing scene, you know that is exactly what happened.
What I don't get is how Neeson and Whitaker allow themselves to deliver such tripe. Virtually nothing in this film makes sense, I won't go into too many details, unless you get distracted by MTV editing, you'll be shaking your head literally every other minute. But the last scene in particular literally made me shout out at the TV.
Neeson is seemingly framed for his wife's murder (the motive of which makes no sense by the end, even the framing itself is laughable), and there are two elements involved some text messages and some bagels. Whitaker at the scene of the crime sits looking at them both, and if you have decided to watch this film with any part of your brain turned on, you'll be screaming at him for not working out the obvious. The film apparently plays in real time, because just over an hour later Whitaker reveals "yeah i knew you were innocent from the beginning, because of the bagels".. he may as well have said "we knew you were innocent, but we needed to chase you otherwise there'd be no excuse for you to trash a whole load of police cars, potentially risk the deaths of many innocent people, destroy an elevator shaft, and for you to kill more Eastern Europeans so Luc Besson can buy a bigger mansion to write his next masterpiece in".
There's a part shortly after Whitaker leaves the crime scene, and Dougray Scott asks Whitaker if he knew about the events of Istanbul, Whitaker may as well say "well, duh, off course i've seen the last movie, who hasn't, $600million at the box office, why you think I'm here bro, we going to make some bank!! Just look at me and say stuff, don't worry about what you're saying though, no one cares, they're tweeting each other, waiting until Neeson shoots someone. Look, I made my character carry around a chess piece and play with a rubber band to give my character appear to have some depth, even though i'm literally the worst detective ever". Literally a few scenes later, Whitaker explains to his pawns that there are no records on Neeson since he joined Special Forces in his 20's, but is magically aware of the events of the last film. Forget the fact this man seemingly went to a lot of trouble and risking his life many times to save his wife, he now decides to go buy some bagels then kill her?
I felt embarrassed that I got roped into watching the film, purely based on how good the first movie was. Thankfully I didn't pay any money, though 2 hours of anyone's time has to be worth something? This is the logic of such film franchises "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me", it's literally as if the film-makers are saying "we're even now". Anyone versed with films knew the moment they heard about "Taken 2", that it was the pure example of a sequel that wasn't going to be any good, the first film had no right to be as good and enjoyable as it was. The sequel is literally as pointless as you can imagine, it is just an excuse to see Neeson kill people, and for the most part that side of things is fun.
The sad news was that the sequel made more money than the original, despite the poor critical reception. The next sequel was inevitable, and we, the film going audience basically told Besson and Co. "you made an awful, pointless film, yet we rewarded you with money, please give us another even more awful film and we will give you more money, don't worry about the script, just make sure Neeson kills people in a cool manner".
There was no need for a good script, I doubt Besson and Kramer even wrote it to be honest, they most likely got some poor grad student to write it within a week, and paid them to take the credit, so they could say in the marketing that it was written by the same guys that wrote the original we loved so much, and Luc Besson, we really liked his films from 20 years ago. "Just make sure there are 3 acts, midpoint all that stuff they expect, and Neeson needs to kill at least 10 people from Russia or the Ukraine, who cares, make sure they sound like bad men. And the twist with this one is that Neeson will be on the run, because his wife has been 'taken' away from him.. get it?! genius right".
Only problem is he only kills 9 people.. one of them can't bear the stupid dialogue anymore and kills himself.. no really, it's the most believable and honest moment in the film, it happens 5 minutes after Neeson develops the power of teleportation and escapes a car while it rolls off the side of a small cliff.
1 star for making an actual film the 2nd star is for tricking me into watching this utter piece of tripe.
I remember Taken 2 being disappointing, but I don't remember it being as bad as Taken 3, a film that is full of nonsensical moments. From the opening scenes, you just know the screenplay was written by Besson & Kamen over a weekend in their Beverly Hills mansion, and by the closing scene, you know that is exactly what happened.
What I don't get is how Neeson and Whitaker allow themselves to deliver such tripe. Virtually nothing in this film makes sense, I won't go into too many details, unless you get distracted by MTV editing, you'll be shaking your head literally every other minute. But the last scene in particular literally made me shout out at the TV.
Neeson is seemingly framed for his wife's murder (the motive of which makes no sense by the end, even the framing itself is laughable), and there are two elements involved some text messages and some bagels. Whitaker at the scene of the crime sits looking at them both, and if you have decided to watch this film with any part of your brain turned on, you'll be screaming at him for not working out the obvious. The film apparently plays in real time, because just over an hour later Whitaker reveals "yeah i knew you were innocent from the beginning, because of the bagels".. he may as well have said "we knew you were innocent, but we needed to chase you otherwise there'd be no excuse for you to trash a whole load of police cars, potentially risk the deaths of many innocent people, destroy an elevator shaft, and for you to kill more Eastern Europeans so Luc Besson can buy a bigger mansion to write his next masterpiece in".
There's a part shortly after Whitaker leaves the crime scene, and Dougray Scott asks Whitaker if he knew about the events of Istanbul, Whitaker may as well say "well, duh, off course i've seen the last movie, who hasn't, $600million at the box office, why you think I'm here bro, we going to make some bank!! Just look at me and say stuff, don't worry about what you're saying though, no one cares, they're tweeting each other, waiting until Neeson shoots someone. Look, I made my character carry around a chess piece and play with a rubber band to give my character appear to have some depth, even though i'm literally the worst detective ever". Literally a few scenes later, Whitaker explains to his pawns that there are no records on Neeson since he joined Special Forces in his 20's, but is magically aware of the events of the last film. Forget the fact this man seemingly went to a lot of trouble and risking his life many times to save his wife, he now decides to go buy some bagels then kill her?
I felt embarrassed that I got roped into watching the film, purely based on how good the first movie was. Thankfully I didn't pay any money, though 2 hours of anyone's time has to be worth something? This is the logic of such film franchises "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me", it's literally as if the film-makers are saying "we're even now". Anyone versed with films knew the moment they heard about "Taken 2", that it was the pure example of a sequel that wasn't going to be any good, the first film had no right to be as good and enjoyable as it was. The sequel is literally as pointless as you can imagine, it is just an excuse to see Neeson kill people, and for the most part that side of things is fun.
The sad news was that the sequel made more money than the original, despite the poor critical reception. The next sequel was inevitable, and we, the film going audience basically told Besson and Co. "you made an awful, pointless film, yet we rewarded you with money, please give us another even more awful film and we will give you more money, don't worry about the script, just make sure Neeson kills people in a cool manner".
There was no need for a good script, I doubt Besson and Kramer even wrote it to be honest, they most likely got some poor grad student to write it within a week, and paid them to take the credit, so they could say in the marketing that it was written by the same guys that wrote the original we loved so much, and Luc Besson, we really liked his films from 20 years ago. "Just make sure there are 3 acts, midpoint all that stuff they expect, and Neeson needs to kill at least 10 people from Russia or the Ukraine, who cares, make sure they sound like bad men. And the twist with this one is that Neeson will be on the run, because his wife has been 'taken' away from him.. get it?! genius right".
Only problem is he only kills 9 people.. one of them can't bear the stupid dialogue anymore and kills himself.. no really, it's the most believable and honest moment in the film, it happens 5 minutes after Neeson develops the power of teleportation and escapes a car while it rolls off the side of a small cliff.
1 star for making an actual film the 2nd star is for tricking me into watching this utter piece of tripe.
Blended
(2014)
Finally a good Sandler film!
15 August 2014
So, I loved, repeat loved Happy Gilmore, Waterboy, The Wedding Singer, Big Daddy, Mr. Deeds, 50 First Dates and even Little Nicky, I watched them repeatedly.. I also love Punch Drunk Love, Reign Over Me and You Don't Mess With the Zohan, a politically charged melodrama for all times.. the fact is, I would watch Grandma's Boy over and over again, I felt this was a brand of comedy and drama that would never disappoint me.. and I would convince myself Jack and Jill was just a misstep and The Grown Up films were merely accidents amongst many others in recent times, but when I saw the trailer for Blended, I had had enough, I just didn't trust the Happy Madison "brand" anymore, despite it being Barrymore and Sandler back together again.. I didn't care.
last night I saw a review similar to the one I'm about to post, and seeking a fun romantic comedy and having seen virtually every other kind of film available to VOD, I decided to give Blended a hesitant try, and thankfully I was not disappointed at all. Like the review I read, I agree, this film has been very poorly marketed, it went for the cheap gags rather than get across the sweet side of things and how it is a decent family film with a restrained adult cheeky side to it. This to me is the Grown Up side of Sandler more than those genuinely awful films with the same moniker.
The production value of the film is completely amazing for $40million, I was kinda blown away, I don't know how much of that was to do with Julio Macat and his team for their stunning Cinematography or what, but the film looks and feels stunning. I can't lie, sometimes I just want to watch a film with amazing locations, good looking people, and a nice storyline with a good sense of humor. I love indie and experimental films, I love film full stop, but I genuinely feel sorry for people that can't watch a film like this and just let go for two hours. "oh it's an Adam Sandler film, i'm going to be dumber by the end of it" or "this has a happy ending, it has no basis for the harsh reality that is life" or probably the worst thing i've heard about this film "it depicts Africa and African people as the typical stereotypes one would expect from such a crass film"..
to all and any of those that shared these sentiments.. as I said I feel sorry that life is so serious for you.. how about you go watch some indie festival darling of a film that represents every other culture to be repressed and full of pathos.. there is nothing obscene about this film, it's a fantasy, it's a film.. two families go to another country outside of the trappings of their usual life, and only then are they able to discover each other and themselves.. simple as that..
I admit it's fairly simplistic in the view that a Father and Mother are only able to fulfill certain roles in parenthood.. there is absolutely no reason why a single father can't buy Tampons, and a single mother understand their son's desire to hide a centerfold.. but this is a comedy, it's not a documentary or some hard boiled drama that is meant to enlighten a human being that is unable to be enlightened enough through their own real life and expect as much through two hours of a piece of fiction.
A really nice film, that to me meets the promise of what the Happy Madison brand aimed to deliver, silly humor that lets you laugh like a man child that doesn't know how to clean up after themselves, wrapped up in a nice warm clean blanket of happiness and joy.
Blended has restored my faith in Sandler! Him and Barrymore have delivered once again.. and repeat praise for Julio Macat, this was one of the best looking films I've seen in ages.. people think it's easy to make a big budget film look good, I really don't believe it is, if anything I think Indie films are easy to DP and make look good/dramatic/moody, but this film just had such an awesome feel and tone to it, it genuinely blew me away, complete masterpiece of cinematography in my opinion! I just know people will pass it off, because it's not some epic drama, but every frame just sang to me.
last night I saw a review similar to the one I'm about to post, and seeking a fun romantic comedy and having seen virtually every other kind of film available to VOD, I decided to give Blended a hesitant try, and thankfully I was not disappointed at all. Like the review I read, I agree, this film has been very poorly marketed, it went for the cheap gags rather than get across the sweet side of things and how it is a decent family film with a restrained adult cheeky side to it. This to me is the Grown Up side of Sandler more than those genuinely awful films with the same moniker.
The production value of the film is completely amazing for $40million, I was kinda blown away, I don't know how much of that was to do with Julio Macat and his team for their stunning Cinematography or what, but the film looks and feels stunning. I can't lie, sometimes I just want to watch a film with amazing locations, good looking people, and a nice storyline with a good sense of humor. I love indie and experimental films, I love film full stop, but I genuinely feel sorry for people that can't watch a film like this and just let go for two hours. "oh it's an Adam Sandler film, i'm going to be dumber by the end of it" or "this has a happy ending, it has no basis for the harsh reality that is life" or probably the worst thing i've heard about this film "it depicts Africa and African people as the typical stereotypes one would expect from such a crass film"..
to all and any of those that shared these sentiments.. as I said I feel sorry that life is so serious for you.. how about you go watch some indie festival darling of a film that represents every other culture to be repressed and full of pathos.. there is nothing obscene about this film, it's a fantasy, it's a film.. two families go to another country outside of the trappings of their usual life, and only then are they able to discover each other and themselves.. simple as that..
I admit it's fairly simplistic in the view that a Father and Mother are only able to fulfill certain roles in parenthood.. there is absolutely no reason why a single father can't buy Tampons, and a single mother understand their son's desire to hide a centerfold.. but this is a comedy, it's not a documentary or some hard boiled drama that is meant to enlighten a human being that is unable to be enlightened enough through their own real life and expect as much through two hours of a piece of fiction.
A really nice film, that to me meets the promise of what the Happy Madison brand aimed to deliver, silly humor that lets you laugh like a man child that doesn't know how to clean up after themselves, wrapped up in a nice warm clean blanket of happiness and joy.
Blended has restored my faith in Sandler! Him and Barrymore have delivered once again.. and repeat praise for Julio Macat, this was one of the best looking films I've seen in ages.. people think it's easy to make a big budget film look good, I really don't believe it is, if anything I think Indie films are easy to DP and make look good/dramatic/moody, but this film just had such an awesome feel and tone to it, it genuinely blew me away, complete masterpiece of cinematography in my opinion! I just know people will pass it off, because it's not some epic drama, but every frame just sang to me.
Pain & Gain
(2013)
Probably the most offensive film I've seen.. but not a bad film.
1 May 2013
I enjoy Bay's films, I don't knock him or use him as the epitome of what is wrong with film- making today, because I don't agree with that sentiment at all, he makes entertaining films, that are big, brash and bold. His ability to direct action scenes is okay, but not great in my opinion, whereas I find the humor and casting in his films to be excellent and really well done.
It seemed after each Transformer film came out you would hear about Bay responding to critics and wishing to be taken seriously, and why not, you go direct a $200 million movie and entertain the masses, no easy task. With Pain and Gain it looked like this was his chance to redeem himself in the eyes of those who are quick to knock him. Relatively low budget, no gun fights, big special effects, somewhat of a return to his Bad Boys days. I was looking forward to it, especially after hearing some good buzz.
I knew it was based on a true story, but I didn't know what that story was.. and to sum up the film very quickly, it's great to look at, nice locations, beautiful women, a camera that never sits still, brilliant cast, and a relatively decent pacing. The problem is the subject matter goes over Bay's head, there is no tact or ability to deliver the dark comedy it is meant to be.. but here's by far the biggest problem, it's simply offensive to portray these characters in a film like this and make them anywhere close to likable.
This is a true story where real people were killed, and innocent people at that, and whether it was 15 years ago or 150 years ago, I am surprised people are excusing and ignoring the fact that these morons have been glorified for the big screen. Yes it's a crazy story, so crazy even the police didn't believe it, but this is something that shouldn't be sensationalized, it basically shouldn't have been a Michael Bay movie, or at least he should have had the guts to not fall back on all his seemingly trade mark shots and approach the film in an original and mature manner.
At the end of the film, I genuinely couldn't believe what I'd seen, I couldn't imagine what it must be like for family members of the victims to know people are profiting from the death of their loved ones, and people are laughing across the world at the recreation of their death.. it's simply horrible.
Take away the true story element of things, this is an entertaining film, that i would give an easy 7/10 to.. but i'm forced to give it one star because it is unforgivable.
It seemed after each Transformer film came out you would hear about Bay responding to critics and wishing to be taken seriously, and why not, you go direct a $200 million movie and entertain the masses, no easy task. With Pain and Gain it looked like this was his chance to redeem himself in the eyes of those who are quick to knock him. Relatively low budget, no gun fights, big special effects, somewhat of a return to his Bad Boys days. I was looking forward to it, especially after hearing some good buzz.
I knew it was based on a true story, but I didn't know what that story was.. and to sum up the film very quickly, it's great to look at, nice locations, beautiful women, a camera that never sits still, brilliant cast, and a relatively decent pacing. The problem is the subject matter goes over Bay's head, there is no tact or ability to deliver the dark comedy it is meant to be.. but here's by far the biggest problem, it's simply offensive to portray these characters in a film like this and make them anywhere close to likable.
This is a true story where real people were killed, and innocent people at that, and whether it was 15 years ago or 150 years ago, I am surprised people are excusing and ignoring the fact that these morons have been glorified for the big screen. Yes it's a crazy story, so crazy even the police didn't believe it, but this is something that shouldn't be sensationalized, it basically shouldn't have been a Michael Bay movie, or at least he should have had the guts to not fall back on all his seemingly trade mark shots and approach the film in an original and mature manner.
At the end of the film, I genuinely couldn't believe what I'd seen, I couldn't imagine what it must be like for family members of the victims to know people are profiting from the death of their loved ones, and people are laughing across the world at the recreation of their death.. it's simply horrible.
Take away the true story element of things, this is an entertaining film, that i would give an easy 7/10 to.. but i'm forced to give it one star because it is unforgivable.
Get the Gringo
(2012)
Great Entertainment!!
10 July 2012
This is an absolutely great B-Movie. To me a B-Movie is something that isn't designed to tax the brain or your emotions, it's simply there to entertain, and if it somehow does do a bit of brain taxation and emotion sensation, then all the better.
The main point of conversation will obviously be Gibson, I personally don't give a monkeys about his personal life, sure it's fun to hear about, but in my mind he hasn't done anything that outright concerns me, he got drunk and mouthed off, i'm a second generation British Indian living in America, I've experienced racism, I've travelled the world, Gibson's drunk ramblings are no different than a bunch of regular people's ramblings, who are also well meaning people, that are just brought up in different circumstances, it's just that he is famous.
But that last paragraph is the problem. The fact this conversation even needs to exist. Mel Gibson is a great screen actor, end of story, he is also a brilliant film maker. Get The Gringo, couldn't have happened in a typical studio scenario, his character isn't perfect, he's not Hollywood friendly, but that's what makes this film so great, you get someone like Gibson playing a role like this, and it just outright works. Great story, excellent direction and a brilliant cast, with an exceptional young performance from the young co-star.
This is just one of those great fun entertaining 90 minute films that is never boring, thrilling, funny and interesting. I don't think 3 words could sum it up any better. I just hope people can separate the real life of an actor to their persona.. how can we expect a human being to play so many characters and not be a character them self? Who knows what scandals the great actors of yesteryear would have been prone to is this age of a thousand cameras and internet.
The main point of conversation will obviously be Gibson, I personally don't give a monkeys about his personal life, sure it's fun to hear about, but in my mind he hasn't done anything that outright concerns me, he got drunk and mouthed off, i'm a second generation British Indian living in America, I've experienced racism, I've travelled the world, Gibson's drunk ramblings are no different than a bunch of regular people's ramblings, who are also well meaning people, that are just brought up in different circumstances, it's just that he is famous.
But that last paragraph is the problem. The fact this conversation even needs to exist. Mel Gibson is a great screen actor, end of story, he is also a brilliant film maker. Get The Gringo, couldn't have happened in a typical studio scenario, his character isn't perfect, he's not Hollywood friendly, but that's what makes this film so great, you get someone like Gibson playing a role like this, and it just outright works. Great story, excellent direction and a brilliant cast, with an exceptional young performance from the young co-star.
This is just one of those great fun entertaining 90 minute films that is never boring, thrilling, funny and interesting. I don't think 3 words could sum it up any better. I just hope people can separate the real life of an actor to their persona.. how can we expect a human being to play so many characters and not be a character them self? Who knows what scandals the great actors of yesteryear would have been prone to is this age of a thousand cameras and internet.
Tell Your Friends