Winter/Spring 2014 Movie Review List... And Spotlight on: AMAZING SPIDERMAN 2 Trailer

Hello, folks...

Do to our busy schedule with friends and family this year, we have curtailed our Holiday 2013 Review. With the posting of FROZEN's review, we will slide into the first of our 2014 reviews. Please expect these to post as time allows over the next few months, and note that the list is subject to change, depending on our activities and how busy we are.

Have a wonderful 2014, folks! Buon Nuovo Anno!

# 536 - POSSESSION (2002)

# 537 - JACK RYAN: SHADOW RECRUIT (2014)

# 538 - THE NUT JOB (2014)

# 539 - THE AWKWARD MOMENT (2014)

# 540 - POMPEII (2014)

# 541 - NONSTOP (2014)

# 542 - DIVERGENT (2014)

# 543 - MR. PEABODY AND SHERMAN (2014)

# 544 - A WINTER'S TALE (2014)

# 545 - NOAH (2014)

# 546 - CAPTAIN AMERICA: WINTER SOLDIER (2014)

# 547 - THE AMAZING SPIDERMAN 2 (2014)



















And, of course, my most anticipated movie of 2014... Go, Andy G!:




Have wonderful, wonderful, wonderful January, folks...

# 535 - FROZEN (2013)

FROZEN (2013 - FAMILY / ADVENTURE / ACTION)
****1/2 out of ***** / 9 out of 10

(After all that snow, I'm ready to spend a year in Hawaii)



CAST: Voices of Kristen Bell, Idina Menzel, Josh Gad, Jonathan Groff, Chris Williams, Ciaran Hinds, Santino Fontana, Alan Tudyk, Edie McClurg.

DIRECTOR: Chris Buck and Jennifer Lee

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and compelling reasons to stay out of Scandinavia - straight ahead.




IT'S LIKE THIS: If you like snow, then our next review is for you. The flick is (aptly, no?) titled FROZEN. And with a moniker like that, it's safe to say there aren't many beach scenes or tanned bods wearing sexy board shorts anywhere in sight. More like dozens and dozens of icicles, blizzard, furry parkas and more snowflakes than on the shoulders of someone with the severest case of dandruff. If you get to the end of this movie and you aren't shivering just a little, you might be already dead, folks. Or a snowman. Like the doofus one named Olaf who runs around in this flick like a monkey that has just downed more than its fair share of espresso shots.

But more on that goofy fucker later. For now let's talk about our heroines. There are two of them, and they are both royal princesses in some far-flung Nordic kingdom. First, we have reserved, responsible older sis Elsa (voice of Idina Menzel). Second, we have adventurous, unpredictable younger sis Anna (Kristen Bell). As you can imagine from their descriptions, Elsa is the one who is always looking out for Anna, who's basically a tomboy in fine royal clothing. Compared to crazy Anna, Elsa seems downright banal. Or is she?

Turns out Elsa possesses a trait that marks her as more than your garden-variety wallflower. You see, apparently, our first-born princess was born with a special power (or curse?) to turn anything she touches into ice. But only when she is emotionally upset. Then Elsa shoots freezing rays out of her fingers. Think of her as a better-looking version of Mr. Freeze (Arnie Schwarzenegger) from BATMAN & ROBIN. But also a lot less bulky. Anyhow, Elsa and Anna's parents decide to isolate Elsa from the kingdom to keep it safe from her icy powers. As you can imagine, this pretty much drives a wedge between the two sisters.

Until the King and Queen of Frigid Land both die in a seafaring accident. Eventually, someone must ascend the throne - and the next in line is none other than our lovely Ms. Freeze, AKA Elsa, herself. Anna remains the rambunctious tomboy and basically makes an ass of herself at the coronation. Mainly because she just met visiting hot prince Oaken (voice of Chris Williams), and turned to even more of a spaz than me whenever Andrew Garfield is within a mile of me (or a hundred).

Meanwhile, Elsa herself is just a tad nervous about accepting the crown. And if you think someone who can freeze entire provinces when she is upset is probably not a great candidate for Ruler of the Land, well, join the fucking club. Sure enough, all the pressure from the coronation ceremony gets to be too much for Elsa - and she basically spazzes out even worse than lil' sis Anna with Oaken or me with Andy G. Yes, folks, it ends just as you thought it would: with the entire land frozen into solid frickin' ice and the whole kingdom reduced to a winter wonder-hell.

Ostracized by the stupid people, Elsa runs off to hide in a nearby mountain range. Still, don't feel too sorry for our dear Snow Queen because it's not all that rough for her. Our girl basically uses her powers to create a bad-ass ice palace more grand than any five-star hotel out there. Meanwhile, the kingdom continues to be buried under, like, a shitload of snow - with the people carping and whining and bitching about all that cold. To which we kind of wondered: "Um, aren't they in Scandinavia? Isn't always fucking cold as shit there all the time, anyway? What's the big fucking deal? It's not like they live in Tahiti or the Philippines. Pussies."

Anyhow, despite our valid point about Nordic weather, the people seem convinced that they will freeze to death after long - so our intrepid tomboy Anna decides to do the Alpha Girl Thang and head into the wilderness to find Elsa. She thinks she can convince Big Sis to let up on the "ice frenzy" and restore the land to its, um, normal climate. Which, as we already questioned before, shouldn't really be much warmer than it is now. But whatevs. I didn't write the damned script. Meanwhile, her hottie prince Oaken will stay behind in the kingdom and hold down the fort, er, the castle, er, you know what I mean.

Along the way, Anna meets rough-around-the-edges trekker Kristoff (voice by Jonathan Groff), who travels with a loyal reindeer named Sven, who is kind of like my goofy cat Guido - but much much much bigger. After the requisite "I-hate-you-I-want-your-body-I-kinda-still-hate-you-but-DAMN-you-are-HOT!" banter between them, Kristoff finally agrees to help Anna get to the mountain peak where Elsa has set up what looks like a Grand Hyatt Hotel preserved inside a giant ice cube.

Oh, and along the way, Kristoff and Anna meet Olaf (voice of Josh Gad), a goofy (even goofier than Kristoff and Sven and Guido) snowman whom Elsa accidentally brought to life with her powers. Fortunately, Olaf is the good-natured sort and agrees to take our search party to Elsa's chilly crib. And also to provide comic relief (even though Kristoff, Anna, and Sven aren't exactly humorless assholes, themselves.) And just like that, we have a Nordic version of The Four Stooges. Well, you know what I mean...

So... will our fearless foursome reach Castle Cold-As-Fuck in time before the kingdom freezes? Or will they manage to talk some sense into Elsa and get her to microwave the entire fucking place back into summer? Or are the denizens of the land all doomed to have blue fingers, blue noses, blue toes, and blue balls (and not the horny kind)? Who will save the day? Anna? Kristoff? Oaken? Sven? That doofy shit Olaf? Or will Elsa be the one to fix the problem she started? How will this all end?

Just don't count on any warm fuzzies, folks. Then again, this is a Disney flick... so count away.


BUT, SERIOUSLY: A couple of years ago, Disney scored big with its revisionist take on the classic Brothers Grimm Fairy Tale "Rapunzel." Then again more recently with the original tale BRAVE, which went down some wonderfully unexpected paths. Now, they are attempting the same thing with Han Christian Andersen's equally classic (but slightly less known) tale, "The Snow Queen." Like TANGLED and "Rapunzel," Disney takes this tale of a girl cursed with the ability to freeze anything she touches when upset and attempts to give it a modern, humorous spin, while still mining some emotional rewards out of it. And like BRAVE, Disney gives the narrative some atypical flourishes. Does it succeed?

The unequivocal answer is "yes." FROZEN gives us a near-perfect combination of humor, action, charm, and pathos. It also manages to impart a worthwhile message about family loyalty and sisterly love, while still being a full-blooded roller-coaster ride of a family film. With this movie, Disney essentially reinvents the "Classic Disney Movie" template. This is one film that can stand proudly next to previous classic from the studio like THE LION KING, THE LITTLE MERMAID, BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, and the more recent BRAVE. In fact, out of all the previous films, the last two are the ones FROZEN reminds us of the most, with their similar tales of a cursed soul who must remain in hiding to protect those he/she loves - and the brave person who takes a huge risk to set him/her free. And like BRAVE and BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, the story takes some atypical, unexpected turns.

The humor here is abundant and, in keeping with modern tastes, has a contemporary zing. Princess Anna's interactions with Prince Oaken and Kristoff (her two love interests) are prime examples. The comical reindeer Sven and quirky snowman Olaf are also comic delights that feel unique to this movie. Even the poised and distant Princess Elsa is given her own moments of lightness, which helps deepen the character. As with TANGLED, FROZEN more than delivers on the humor quotient.

Where FROZEN trumps TANGLED, however, is in the emotions department. Whereas the latter was a funny roller-coaster ride with some seriously engaging characters, the former takes the very same template - and deepens those characters. The result is a more potent "staying power" and emotional resonance. In other words, FROZEN tugs at your heart-strings in a way that TANGLED didn't even bother to do despite its strengths. And as we have talked about in past reviews, what makes a very good movie (****, 8) go into the realm of excellent films (****1/2 , 9 or higher) is a strong emotional center. As we talked about in our review for the modern classic GLADIATOR, the best movies are the ones that you remember the most - and you remember them because they made you feel something, whether you realize it or not. In this regard, FROZEN is more like BRAVE - another Disney film with two female protagonists at its heart - and a compelling emotional fulcrum at its core.

In FROZEN, the themes are timeless and worthwhile - but also unexpected. Instead of a classic "boy-girl" love story (like TANGLED), the story's focus is on the love between two sisters. Anyone with sisters will relate to this film, and the main thread of this film tracks the risks, dangers, and sacrifices that Anna must make, not just to save the kingdom, but to save her sister Elsa from a life of isolation and sadness. Just like BRAVE's refreshing emphasis on a mother-daughter bond, FROZEN's focus on Anna and Elsa's sisterly connection, and the trials they overcome because of it, yield major emotional rewards at the end of the film.

Kudos must be given to the entire cast for their stellar voicing. The same praise goes to helmers Chris Buck and Jennifer Lee for the expert way they spin this magical tale of sisterhood and sacrifice. If Disney continues on this track, they may very well enter another "Golden Era" like the one from the 80s and 90s - providing us with modern classic after modern classic. BRAVE and FROZEN are beautiful recent examples of that.

In closing, I dedicate this review to my sister. Love ya, sis. I would walk through an ice storm or blizzard for you.

And, yes... this film is, like BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, also a musical. Please find below some stellar numbers and setpieces from FROZEN:

Raise Your Glass... to 2014!

Hello, folks...

Just a quick belated Merry Christmas greeting to everyone. Sorry. Been quite busy with the Holidays. One of the reasons we love Christmas is because it gives us an excuse to celebrate family and friendship. With that in mind, let's all go into the New Year with smiles, laughter, and - of course - raised glasses.

Happy New Year to one and all... : )

And, of course, what would New Year's Eve be without our party anthem...

# 534 - THE HUNGER GAMES: CATCHING FIRE (2013)

THE HUNGER GAMES: CATCHING FIRE (2013 - SCI FI / ACTION / THRILLER)
**** out of ***** / 8 out of 10

(Into the breach once more we go, dear Tributes...)



CAST: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Sam Claflin, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Jena Malone, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Donald Sutherland, Lenny Kravitz.

DIRECTOR: Francis Lawrence

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and compelling reasons to watch the 75th Annual Hunger Games - straight ahead...




IT'S LIKE THIS: Ah, Cinematic Trilogies and Franchises... has there even been an easier cash cow or payheck in Hollywood? I'm thinking, no. Think about it: all you have to do is have your first movie hit big, then if you're smart all you have to do is ride that wave for as long as it will take you. And the sequels don't even have to be good or even average - just look at those fucking TWILIGHT movies. If I see another picture of Bella and Edward giving each other googley eyes, I think I'm going to puke.

Fortunately, our next review doesn't have any pale-as-ass vampires or their useless, tag-along, human girlfriends. That's because our next flick is THE HUNGER GAMES, PART DEUX, also known as CATCHING FIRE. Now, folks, unless "FIRE" is the name of some new venereal disease, I'm thinking we have some awesome thrills in store for us. If you'll recall, HUNGER GAMES PART UNO revolved around a future dystopian (meaning: shitty) society wherein famine and tyrannical rule are as common as I-phones and Facebook are today. Oh, and the Reaping. That's popular, too.

If you folks will also recall, our bad-ass heroine Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) was a lowly hunter from District 12 (which looked like the Appalachias) who sacrificed herself to save little sis Primrose (Willow Shields) from being chosen as a "tribute" for the, ahem, "Hunger Games." I don't have to remind you folks that the "games" basically consisted of 24 tributes hunting each other down in the middle of some technologically-controlled artificial wilderness - until one survivor remained standing. However, as you also already know if you saw the first flick, Katniss and her lapdog Peta Mallark (Josh Hutcherson) gamed the system (and the game) and managed to be declared the sole survivors. Which makes no goddamned sense because "sole" means "one." Whatever.
So, as CATCHING SYPHILLIS, er, CATCHING FIRE begins, we find that Katniss and Peta have been, um, reaping the benefits of being the "winners" of the 74th Annual games from the first flick. Unfortunately, a quiet fade into the sunset just doesn't seem to be in the cards for our lead couple. You see, President Snow (Donald Sutherland) is just a wee bit pissed off that Katniss and Peta outsmarted the rulebook and fears their cleverness has inspired the various districts to begin pushing back against the Republic. He pays a surprise visit to Katniss and her family, and basically tells Kat in private that this shit isn't over. Not by a fucking longshot, sweetie.

Sure enough, when the Reaping for the next Hunger Games comes around, Katniss and Peta are dismayed to find out the 75th Annual Kill-A-Thon will be comprised of tributes... from the winners and survivors of all the previous games. What the what? Apparently, this is President Snow's way of getting rid of Katniss and kill her rapidly growing status as a "hero." Oh, and he wants to just flat out kill her, too. As you can imagine, Katniss and Peta aren't exactly over the moon about this news. More like over the toilet seat, puking out of terror.

And so it goes... and once again starts up the whole dog-and-pony ceremonial show that Katniss, Peta, mentor Haymitch Abernathy (Woody Harrelson), and wacky event planner Effie Trinkett (Elizabeth Banks) embarked on in the first movie. Which includes: (1) parading their asses around the capital in search of "sponsors"; (2) training relentlessly to get back into shape for the games; and (3) generally wearing a lot of truly awful fashion. Well, except for that one awesome burning-mockingjay-spinning-scarlet-red gown that Katniss's fashion designer pal Cinna (Lenny Kravitz) makes for her. I would totally wear that shit and rock it.

Oh, and I should also point out that Katniss and Peta's adversaries this time around are proven killers - what with them all being survivors from the previous games. A few of our charming assassins are: (1) Finnick Odair (Sam Claflin), preening pretty-boy who, from the looks of it, spent most of his winnings on highlights and spray-tans; (2) Johanna Mason (Jena Malone), bitchy tramp who, from the looks of it, is a total whore; (3) Beetee (Geoffrey Wright), crafty geek who, from the looks of it, really loves his goatee more than anything else on Earth; (4) Mags (Lynn Cohen), older chick who, from the looks of it, thinks of Finnick as her surrogate daughter, er, son; (5) Wiress (Amanda Plummer), tweaky spaz who, from the looks of it, is just one "boo!" scare away from shitting her pants right then and there; and (6) Brutus (Bruno Gunn), who, from the looks of it, is probably the most ruthless of all the tributes judging by his, um, shaved head. There's more than a dozen other tributes, but these half-dozen are the ones who are the most interesting - and who just might prove to be either valuable allies to Katniss and Peta, or their most terrifying nemeses. Hmmmmm....

So... how will the 75th Annual Hunger Games pan out? Can Katniss and Peta repeat their success from the previous game? Will the Republic and President Snow fall for another bullshit "Romeo and Juliet" number? Or will it be curtains for our dear couple? And how will Haymitch protect his wards? Does he possess valuable info that can save them? Or are his hands tied this time around? And who amongst the tributes will be the inevitable traitor? But by the same token, who among them will be the surprise savior to Katniss?

One word, folks: hhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....


BUT SERIOUSLY: The rules for creating a terrific movie trilogy are, appropriately, three-fold: (1) start strong and captivate, (2) go deep and up the ante, (3) then bring everything full circle and finish even stronger. These rules sound deceptively simple, but are tricky to pull off. The fact remains they are at the heart of the best film trilogies in cinema history: STARS WARS, THE LORD OF THE RINGS, THE DARK KNIGHT, and even SCREAM. All these trilogies had first movies that opened strongly and captivated, second films that went deeper and upped the stakes, and final films that brought things back full circle to the first films and ended even stronger. Trilogies like THE GODFATHER and THE MATRIX were weakened by third films that failed to live up to the quality of the earlier films, underscoring the importance of adhering to the rules.

It might be a little too early to tell, but THE HUNGER GAMES films seem to be shaping up into a formidable trilogy. The first film opened strong and laid the groundwork. It was a reasonably entertaining action/thriller that vividly introduced us to the world of Katniss Everdeen and the sinister games that she and her fellow tributes must participate in against their will. Now, the second film fulfills the rules of a classic trilogy by simultaneously deepening the themes and upping the stakes - and is a markedly better film that its predecessor. All the emotional groundwork laid down by THE HUNGER GAMES is beautifully furthered and built upon by CATCHING FIRE - and audience investment is considerably higher this time around.

Part of the reason we empathize even stronger with Katniss and Peta this time around, is because we witnessed what they had to do to survive the first games. Resultantly, we feel like we survived along with them. So when they are involuntarily pulled back into the fray, we are right there with them. It helps considerably that, as with the first film, all the roles are filled with the ideal performer. Josh Hutcherson is once again a perfect combo of boy and man, while Liam Hemsworth is more affecting this time around as Gale, Katniss's love interest, since he is given slightly more to do. Woody Harrelson and Elizabeth Banks are also back again as Haymitch and Effie, invaluable members of Kat and Peta's team. Banks is particularly affecting this time around, with Effie showing an actual emotional attachment to Kat and Peta.

Indeed, CATCHING FIRE beautifully exemplifies the rules of the second film in a classic trilogy: go deeper and up the ante. The "upping the ante" part reveals itself with the unexpected paths that the games take.in this chapter. The first film had a strong first half because it focused on the intricacies and shifty politics of the dystopian capital, as well as the human minefield that Kat and Peta were forced to navigate to attain sponsors capable of aiding their survival later in the games. The games themselves were merely okay and - apart from some quirky flourishes - resembled the "fight-for-survival" antics of many other wilderness survival films. The games in CATCHING FIRE, however, are a different beast entirely. There is more emotional nuance and ambiguity to the characters and proceedings. In short, there is real suspense now - and the finale, which I refuse to spoil or even hint at, wonderfully sets the stage for the third, final, and hopefully most breathtaking entry in the trilogy.

Finally, no review of any HUNGER GAMES film would be complete without paying tribute (pun intended) to its star: the formidable, mercurial Jennifer Lawrence. Put simply, the strength of HUNGER GAMES is due primarily to Lawrence's unmistakable star quality and her ability to cast a long shadow with minimal effort. The role of Katnis Everdeen is one that requires someone who can clearly and rivetingly express all of the character's complex internal mechanics - often with just glances, gestures, and expressions. The role also requires someone who can believably go verbally toe-to-toe with some powerful authority figures played by more experienced, veteran performers in intense dialogue scenes. If even one side of this equation was compromised, the performance would have been diminished. Happily, Jennifer Lawrence is that rarity even in Hollywood: a star who is truly a star. She is genuinely amazing.

In the end, CATCHING FIRE is a very good example of a "second" film in a trilogy. Let's hope that the third installment, titled MOCKINGJAY and due to be released in two parts over the next two years, will provide a stellar capper to the HUNGER GAMES trilogy.

# 533 - ENDER'S GAME (2013)

ENDER'S GAME (2013 - SCI FI / ADVENTURE / ACTION)
***1/2 out of ***** / 7 out of 10

(Think of it as Basic Training for Space Bratz)



CAST: Harrison Ford, Asa Butterfield, Hailee Stenfeld, Viola Davis, Abigail Breslin, Jimmy Pinchak, Ben Kingsley.

DIRECTOR: Gavin Hood

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and compelling reasons to read a book before seeing the movie - straight ahead.




IT'S LIKE THIS: Ah, Boot Camp. Think of it as hazing for the world's most elaborate and privileged fraternity: the Military. This is how I framed Basic Training to an acquaintance getting ready to attend it. I told him to think of himself and his fellow recruits as fraternity pledges being put through the paces by dickhead upperclassmen (i.e., drill sergeants) for six to eight weeks. But when it's all done, it is all keg parties and pussy (or dick) galore. But in the case of the military, make that international keg parties and international pussy (or dick) galore - since the military is the kind of fraternity that circles the globe, and you get to have a whole slew of interesting experiences (and, um, people). But like your average pledge at Delta Pi Whatever, ya just gotta first make it through the gauntlet. And the best way to do that is with a sense of humor.

Which brings us to our next review, ENDER'S GAME, which is basically a Boot Camp Flick disguised as a Slam Bang Action Film - with very little humor, excepting one awesome one-liner about someone's mother than I actually used on an asshole I went to school with. But more on that switcheroo later in our BUT SERIOUSLY portion. For now, let's discuss the plot of this film that is based on a (apparently) classic novel by Orson Scott Card. In the opening we are told that Earth has been attacked by a bunch of bug-like aliens (is there any other kind these day?) called the Formic. Fortunately, the pesky critters got their asses handed to them because of the heroic sacrifice of Major Mazer Rackham (Ben Kingsley). The surviving Formic skedaddled back to their cosmos on the ass-end of the Universe - and have not returned since then.

Not content to sit on his ass and wait for the next onslaught, however, powerful military figure Colonel Graff (Harrison Ford) convinces the World's governments to set up a formidable pre-emptive offense that involves... recruiting a bunch of whiny adolescents. Apparently, Colonel Graff believe that teens and pre-teens make the ideal combatants because they're still impressionable and sort of, um, developing. But (let's face it) mainly because the script told him so. This is how our hero, Ender Wiggin (Asa Butterfield), gets pulled into the maelstrom. Apparently, his other two sibling have already washed out of the training program: younger sib Valentine (Abigail Breslin) was too empathetic and ended up caring too much for the Formic, while older bro Peter (Jimmy Pinchak) was too bloodthirsty and endangered his own comrades in battling the aliens.

Colonel Graff slowly comes to believe that Ender just might be the perfect blend of Valentine's compassionate emotional nature - and Peter's ruthless, formidable one. In short, Ender would make the perfect commander because of his ideal blend of feeling and courage. Or at least, that's what Graff tells his colleague, Colonel Gwen Anderson (Viola Davis). Now all Ender has to do is deliver on the promise that Graff seems so sure is within him. Not that there's any kind of pressure on poor Ender. Good luck, kid. You'll need it.

So... will Colonel Graff be proven right? Is Ender the "one" they have all been waiting for to vanquish the threat of the Formic? And are the Formic planning to come back to attack Earth anyway? Is Colonel Graff right when he says Earth must strike first to teach the Formic to never fuck with us again? Or is it yet another example of overly-aggressive military strategy? And will Ender himself choose to participate? How will this all end for Ender and his fellow teenybopper warrior recruits?

Not sure, but I'm thinking they're not going to wind up at the local mall to hang out for a couple of hours and do nothing special before catching a flick at the Cineplex next door. Ah, the joys of being average....


BUT SERIOUSLY: Movie marketing can be very tricky. You want to entice the audience without giving away too much, as some narrative cards should be kept firmly up the sleeve and saved for the actual viewing of the movie. On the other hand, if you don't reveal enough about the movie in the trailers, you may end up not piquing the interest of the prospective viewers - and the film can open weakly. What you don't want to do, however, is sell a film to be what it is not. That may work in the short run by attracting audiences during opening weekend - but in the long term it can prove disastrous, as word-of-mouth spreads fast that the film is not what it was sold to be. And movie audiences can be very unforgiving and have long memories - which affects the reception of future sequels.

Such is the case of our latest film, ENDER'S GAME. Based on a popular novel by Orson Scott Card from the mid-80s, this film is said to be quite faithful to the source material. Anyone who has read the book will know exactly what they are getting as they go in to the film. However, majority of the target audience for this movie (teens and young adults) were born after the book was published and most likely haven't read it - and they have only the trailers and previews to rely on to determine what the movie is about. And therein lies the probem...

You see, the trailers for ENDER'S GAME make it look like a dynamic action film filled with battles with the Formic aliens. In reality, the film is essentially an extended series of training segments. There is a twist at the end that cleverly plays off the whole "training warfare vs. real warfare" and is quite devastating, but this movie is more of a cerebral rather than visceral thriller. Hardcore action fans will not get their fix here. Those of us who like our thrills a little bit more heady, though, will have no problem with it.
However, because this film was marketed as an intense action/thriller, that is the majority of the audience it attracted - at first. Since it opened, ENDER'S GAME has dropped sharply at the box office. It has nothing to with the quality, but disappointed expectations from the wrong crowd. The action movie crowd.

Quality-wise, the film is solid. The story is actually quite compelling and intellectual, exploring as it does how a hero should balance ruthlessness and resolve with compassion and humanity. It also preaches a theme of tolerance, which is quite surprising because of Orson Scott Card's reported homophobia. Whatever the disparity between the themes of ENDER'S GAME and the beliefs of its original writer, the movie itself is quite refreshing and thought-provoking. And, once again, therein lies the problem: the marketing of this film did not paint it to be the heady and cerebral coming-of-age film that it is. Instead, the press made it sound like yet another action-filled entry into the "Humans Vs. Aliens" sub-genre. And it most definitely is not.

Asa Butterfield is okay as Ender. When I say "okay" I mean he is passable, but he is certainly not as dynamic or compelling as we would like. Same with Hailee Stenfeld as Ender's love interest Petra. She, too, is competent but, again, not necessarily commanding. The same can be said for the rest of the young cast. They don't do anything wrong, per se, but they don't exactly stand out, either. Harrison Ford is similarly solid-but-unremarkable. He doesn't bring the fire and passion that the role of Colonel Graff screams for. Someone like Lawrence Fishburne would have nailed this role. By contrast, Ford almost seems to be phoning it in. Fortunately, the plot of ENDER'S GAME remains interesting enough at its core to keep its relatively bland cast from hurting it. The only two castmembers who distinguish themselves are Viola Davis and Ben Kingsley. Davis is quietly riveting as Colonel Gwen Anderson, Graff's more compassionate colleague, while Kingsley brings energy and charisma to the pivotal role of Mazer Rackham.

In the end, ENDER'S GAME is a good adaptation of the novel. It's just a shame the marketing didn't reflect the true nature of the story. With the right promotion, it might have attracted the right audiences - a more intellectually-inclined one instead of an action-oriented one. And with a more dynamic cast (excepting Viola Davis and Ben Kingsley), this movie could have rated higher. As it is, it's merely good.

Last but not the least, Steve Jablonsky’s visceral, stunning musical score for ENDER’S GAME deserves praise. It goes a long way in accentuating the emotional urgency of the storyline. As with his music for the underrated BATTLESHIP, Jablonksy uses an array of electronic and conventional instruments to create an elegant and energetic score that strengthens the film.

# 532 - THOR: THE DARK WORLD (2013)

THOR: THE DARK WORLD (2013 - SUPERHERO ADVENTURE / ACTION)
*** out of ***** / 6 out of 10

(Wow! Chris Hemsworth's boobs are bigger than Natalie Portman's!



CAST: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Christopher Eccleston, Anthony Hopkins, Renee Russo, Kat Dennings, Stellan Skarsgaard, Jaimie Alexander, Jonathan Howard, Idris Elba.

DIRECTOR: Alan Taylor

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and compelling reasons to stick to Earthbound heroes - straight ahead.




IT'S LIKE THIS: Ah, Thor... is there a more out-of-place comic book superhero in the pantheon of comic book superheroes? I think not. Think about it: unlike his Earthbound colleagues like Peter Parker/Spiderman, Clark Kent/Superman, Bruce Wayne/Batman, Steve Rogers/Captain America, and Tony Stark/Iron Man, Thor doesn't have an alternate identity. He's just... Thor. And unlike those other dudes who battle crime, corruption, and evil on Earth, he spends half of his time fucking around on his home turf of Asgard with all its political backstabbing and squabbling, clocking only about 50% of his work in our world doing what superheroes should be doing: battling villains and saving Earth.

So... is he really a superhero? Or a member of fucking THE LORD OF THE RINGS universe? We shall discuss that later in the BUT SERIOUSLY portion of our review. For now, let's recap what happened in THOR 1: Thor was tossed out of Asgard for being a drunken hooligan, wound up on Earth where he met hottie astrophysicist Dr. Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) and experienced the kind of horrific culture shock that a country bumpkin from Kentucky normally gets while visiting Japan.

Meanwhile back on (yawn) Asgard, Thor's adopted brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) decided to make a power play for the throne and steal it from their dad, Odin (Anthony Hopkins) - which led to some serious fur flying. And trust when I say these Nordic gods are some furry creatures. Anyhow, you don't have to be a rocket scientist of Dr. Jane Foster's caliber to conclude that things eventually ended well: Thor triumphed over Loki, Odin regained control of Asgard, and Jane finally admitted to herself that she would love to suck Thor's balls dry - which left the door open for a sequel.

And here we are now with THOR 2: THE DARK WORLD. As our story starts, Asgard appears to be in the shitter yet again, as trouble looms on the horizon in the form of some sort of "Dark Matter" that is threatening to destroy all of The Nine Realms. And if you have deduced that Earth is one of those realms, then good on you for being a quick study. If not, then with all due respect, don't let the door hit your bony ass on the way out. Thank you.

Anyhow, Dr. Jane Foster is pulled back into the fray when she somehow gets "infected" by the dark matter, and must help Thor battle new baddie Malekith (Christopher Eccleston) to keep the asshole from destroying the Multiverses. However, if you think Dr. Jane turns into a sassy, feisty, decisive sidekick like her fellow hottie movie scientist Dr. Christmas Jones (Denise Richards) from the THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH, then it is my sad duty to disappoint you. Suffice it to say, unlike Dr. Christmas, Dr. Jane doesn't blow the whistle on any spies masquerading as nuclear physicists, or defuse nuclear bombs while hurtling through an oil pipeline at 70 miles an hour, or outrun exploding fireballs, or save James Bond from drowning. Nope, Dr. Jane simply just gets dragged around from place to place while looking like she has a really bad flu.

Oh, and we should also mention that Jane's terminally snarky intern Darcy Lewis is back for the ride, with an intern of her own (don't ask). He is Ian Boothboy (Jonathan Howard), and let's just say you just know he and Darcy are going to be trading body fluids before the movie is over. Call it a hunch. Or experience. Also trying to help Thor and Jane from the Earthside is wacky physics professor Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgaard). However, given that Erik can only think clearly when he's not wearing pants, I wouldn't put much stock in him if I were Thor or Jane.

So... will Malekith destroy all of the realms? And what happens when Thor gets so desperate for help that he releases Loki (you know? his brother? the bad guy from the first flick?) to help him? Is Thor so stupid as to believe that Loki wouldn't eventually betray him? Or is there more to Loki than meets the eye? Will he save Thor when it really counts? Or will he see this as another opportunity to grab power and seize the throne of Asgard? And will Jane finally get to knock boots with Thor? Or is she destined to pine for him from afar?

Well, considering she weighs about 1/1000000th of his total body weight, I'm thinking she may not survive coitus. Sweetie, go fuck Peter Parker/Spiderman instead. Less muscles to worry about. Better looking guy, too. Just saying...


BUT SERIOUSLY: In our intro we joked about how Thor is a bit of an anomaly when it comes to the legion of Comic Book Superheroes - but it is actually quite true. Unlike virtually all of the rest of them, Thor has no secret identity, nor does he spend all of his time on Earth. The "ordinary person thrust into an extraordinary role" element of most superhero backgrounds is conspicuously missing with Thor's mythos.

Thor's not like Peter Parker/Spiderman who was your average young man navigating his way through life when he gets bitten by a radioactive spider AND loses his beloved uncle in a mugging - setting the stage for Peter to become a determined vigilante. Nor is Thor like Bruce Wayne/Batman who has a similarly tragic backstory as Peter Parker - but is also infinitely wealthier, making it easy for him to invest in high-tech gadgetry to stomp out crime in Gotham City.

And even Clark Kent/Superman, who superficially resembles Thor in that they are both superbeings from another world, is also different from him. Clark Kent's home planet Krypton was destroyed and he has no choice but to find his way through his new home called Earth, and find a way to co-exist with humans while also protecting his identity as a superbeing. By contrast, Thor is always Thor and he constantly toggles between his home world of Asgard and Earth, which disrupts any momentum or relatability one starts to feel towards him. And unless you find Asgard thoroughly fascinating (we don't) then the excursions to that realm start to feel like leftovers from a cancelled FLASH GORDON sequel. Our outtakes from a LORD OF THE RINGS movie.

And that is the main problem with THOR: THE DARK WORLD - we spend waaaaaaaay too much time in Asgard. Unlike the original THOR from a couple of years ago, this movie is filled with extended passages of Thor, Odin, Loki, Frigga, and the rest of the Immortals engaging in political intrigue in their other-wordly domain. What made the first THOR so engaging was the humor that came out of Thor's conflicts with "the real world" AKA Earth. His interactions with Dr. Jane Foster, Darcy Lewis, and Erik Selvig were all humorous and made the storyline relatable. The excursions to Asgard were kept to a minimum, with the storyline mainly focused on Loki's threat to Earth and its denizens.

Unfortunately, in a clear (and ultimately misguided) attempt to not repeat themselves, the makes of THOR: THE DARK WORLD have chosen to center most of the sequel in Asgard this time. Only in the final act do we return for any significant amount of screen time to Earth for a show-stopping (and movie-saving) climactic battle in the middle of modern-day London. This long setpiece is filled with energy, humor, and fire (both literally and figuratively). Quite frankly, it redeems the film and keeps it from sinking to the average mark. Had director Alan Taylor found a way to energize the narrative much earlier on, this film would have rated as highly as the first THOR did.

The cast is certainly competent. Chris Hemsworth once again proves to be a solid presence as Thor, even though he doesn't necessarily have the emotional depth of Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker/Spiderman or sexy unpredictability of Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark/Iron Man. Hemsworth had more to play with, humor-wise, in the first film. Here, he is stuck playing the serious "straight guy" contrast to bad-boy brother Loki (played by Tom Hiddleston in another delicious, show-stealing performance). The character could have used more of the fire he had in the original. Nevertheless, Hemsworth acquits himself well.
Speaking of Loki, Tom Hiddleston manages to turn in an even more interesting (if that's possible) performance than the one in the original film. In THOR, Loki was a complex villain who clearly had chosen the dark side - and Hiddleston infused his portrayal with layers of ice-cold calculation and hidden hurts. Here, he delivers those same dimensions - but enlivens them with a delightfully sardonic humor. THOR: THE DARK WORLD's best plot thread is how Loki is reluctantly freed from his Asgard prison by Thor so that they can help each other overcome new baddie Malekith (Christopher Eccleston, whom let's just say is no Tom Hiddleston when it comes to being a bad guy). Once again, Hiddleston easily steals the show from Hemsworth, and gives us an even more dazzling presentation. Quite frankly, without him this sequel would have been average and nothing more.

Another strong aspect of THOR: THE DARK WORLD is, as with the first movie, its "human" element. Natalie Portman is once again delightful as Dr. Jane Foster, who takes the stereotypical "brainy babe scientist" role and makes it relatable and funny the way Denise Richards did with her similar role as Dr. Christmas Jones in the Bond film THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH. As with Richards' casting in that movie, the gorgeous Portman has been knocked for playing a brilliant astrophysicist. However, let's not forget that actually Portman graduated from Harvard, folks. And who says someone so pretty can't have a PhD? A good friend of mine has a boss who is in her late twenties and has a PhD in Bio-Chemistry - and looks like a supermodel. Are Dr. Jane Foster and Dr. Christmas Jones really that unbelievable? Don't think so.

As with the first film, Kat Dennings provides a mother lode of comic relief as Darcy Lewis, Jane's lippy intern. A bonus in this film is Darcy's relationship with her own intern, Ian Boothboy, played with goofy cluelessness by British actor Jonathan Howard. There's a great gag between Darcy and Ian during the climactic battle that is a riot. Darcy's humor once again provides welcome relief from some of the more serious elements of the storyline. Same goes for Stellan Skarsgaard, who gives the role of Erik Selvig even more quirks than in the first film. Running around without pants on to be able to think clearly comes to mind.

Anthony Hopkins, Renee Russo, Idris Elba, Jaimie Alexander, and Ray Stevenson form the pedigreed supporting cast and denizens of Asgard. As with the first film, they all have their "moments in the sun" but are careful to never steal the show from the main performers. Besides, Tom Hiddleston as Loki already did that.

In the end, THOR: THE DARK WORLD is not as good as THOR. However, it does have its moments. Let's hope that the third film spends more time on Earth than Asgard. And let's pray for the return of Darcy and Ian....

Holiday Movie Season 2013 - And Onward to 2014!

Hello, folks...

Just a quick note to say sorry for the delay in posting the last of our Halloween 2013 reviews. As you may have noticed, we shortened the list a bit. It's been a very busy last two months, but also very fun with friends and family interacting together. That’s what life is about, folks…

At any rate, please find below our HOLIDAY MOVIE SEASON 2013 reviews. Given how busy we are, please expect one review per week until the New Year. Thanks, all - and to the Americans out there, have a Wonderful Thanksgiving!

# 532 - THOR: THE DARK WORLD (2013)

# 533 - ENDER'S GAME (2013)

# 534 - THE HUNGER GAMES: CATCHING FIRE (2013)

# 535 - ANCHORMAN 2: THE LEGEND CONTINUES (2013)

# 536 - THE SECRET LIFE OF WALTER MITTY (2013)

# 537 - A CHRISTMAS STORY 2 (2012)

# 538 - ONE CHANCE (2013)

# 539 - LOOPER (2013)

# 540 - BARNEY'S VERSION (2009)
















And here’s a sneak peek at some of the highly-anticipated events of 2014 (and I don’t just mean The World Cup!):














Ciao ciao, folks...