Movie Review: 22 Jump Street

Pretty entertaining, but a bit repetitive. The overall plot and concept of this movie is pretty much the same as the first “Jump Street” film. In fact, there is a recurring joke in the film about the repeated storylines. The movie itself come very close to breaking the third wall on multiple occasions, and borders on feeling like a parody film, such as “Scary Movie.” Luckily, Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum still have great chemistry together and the dumb jock/dork combination provides plenty of humor. The friction between the two is another rehash from the first film, although this time the joke is to portray their relationship as if they were two bickering lovers, which is funny at points but gets old after a while. While Ice Cube gets a bigger role here and has some fun with it, a few characters seem to just exist to make different versions of the same joke, over and over again. Overall, the jokes are hit and miss, but there are some hugely funny moments. The end credits feature a pretty funny montage that goes on for a bit, but has just enough twists to keep it interesting.

*** out of *****

Movie Review: Edge of Tomorrow (3D)

Good concept, solid acting and good execution, but the film doesn’t quite deliver in the end. The time-travel element is the heart of the movie, but there are plenty of holes in it. As long as you can ignore these and just enjoy the story, this isn’t much of an issue. Tom Cruise is still an engaging lead, playing both the military PR man and the warrior he becomes convincingly. Emily Blunt’s character is fine in the action scenes, but her overly mysterious nature makes it difficult to get too into her. The fellow soldiers we meet early in the film have potential to be somewhat interesting, but they get shuffled to the background early on and have little impact on the story. The alien creatures have a unique design, but they rarely stand still long enough to admire it. Generally, they move so fast that they’re just a blur, looking a bit like the squid-like robots from “The Matrix” if they were on speed. The time-loop has potential to get tedious, but they show just enough to advance the story or inject some well-placed humor. There is a point where Cruise’s character has an epiphany, but it’s downplayed too much and never really feels like the turning point it was meant to be. The end of the film is a bit muddled, and the ending is a cop-out that is telegraphed pretty clearly. (Not to mention that it creates one of the bigger plot holes in the film.) The 3D was actually not too bad, less than a distraction then I expected.

**1/2 out of *****

Movie Review: X-Men: Days of Future Past

Solid film, but gets a little lost near the end. The film is based upon one of the all-time most classic X-Men stories. Besides tweaking it to accommodate what the previous films have established and making Wolverine the star of the story, it sticks pretty well to the original concept. Most of the characters have appeared previously, and all the actors once again do a great job in their roles. For their limited screen time, the new characters have some memorable moments. Quicksilver, in particular, has possibly the best moment in the entire film. The weakest link is Peter Dinklage’s Bolivar Trask. It was an odd casting choice, but he has the acting skills to make up for it. However, the character is fairly bland. A good comic book villain is either evil or misguided, and Trask just doesn’t bring the conviction to sell his misguided ideas. The plot risks getting confusing at time, but juggles the past and future pretty well. Late in the film, there’ kina of a “What now?” moment, where there suddenly seems to be a loss of direction and we’re not sure who the heroes are supposed to be stopping. Luckily, a pretty action-packed finale alleviates this. The action sequences, especially those in the future, are solid and are surprisingly violent. (In fact, this film is a “hard” PG-13. There’s brutal, but generally bloodless, violence, a fair amount of profanity including on “F-Bomb,” and a hard to miss shot of nudity.) Like any story involving time-travel, there are some alterations that occur when it’s all said and done. While many fans will be happy to see some that some of the things that they despised have now apparently never happened, it also means that things that they did enjoy may have also never happened. There’s a small scene after the credits, but only this biggest comic geeks will understand it.

**** out of *****

Movie Review: Godzilla (2014)

A boring build-up that wasn’t saved by the action-filled finale. The bulk of the film was spent slowly building towards the giant monster fight at the end. We’d get a tease of some action, and then nothing for a while. Then a few minutes of monsters, followed by nothing for a while. There were a lot of sequences where we apparently just missed the monsters ripping apart civilization, leaving us with only a shot of damaged structures as the beasts wandered away in the distance. Once Godzilla finally shows up, it looks like things are about to heat-up, but even then, they find a way to stall for time until the climactic battle takes place. And while this battle is really intense, it’s much too short. The plot is weak. It’s all over the place and takes a long time to put together the seemingly random events that have occurred thus far. The characters are generally boring. The great Bryan Cranston’s time is quite limited, leaving the rest of the film to focus on the much- less-interesting costars. Elizabeth Olson is pretty much just there to pop-up once and a while and worry about where her husband is, and Aaron Taylor Johnson seems to be there just to pop-up next to the monsters when they’re destroying stuff in the background. Ken Watanabe has a mystique about him, making him interesting and making the observations he seems to pull out of nowhere plausible. (This can’t be held against the film-makers, but there was something off-putting about knowing that the actors playing husband and wife here would be playing brother and sister in a major film next year.) There also seemed to be this tendency to just randomly put children into scenes right before monsters attack, trying to elicit a reaction from the audience. The special effects were really good, so when we do see the monsters and the chaos it causes, it looks great. I ended up seeing the 3D version, and felt that it added nothing to the film.

** out of *****

Movie Review: The Amazing Spider-Man 2

Overall, an enjoyable film that’s hampered by too much going on. What works well, just like the first film, is the chemistry between Peter and Gwen. It gets a little corny at times, especially with the repeated breakups and makeups. Andrew Garfield is still strong in his role as Peter, but even better as Spidey. I’ve laughed out loud from Spidey’s one-liners while reading the comic books, and they nail this aspect of him here…although this comes very close to being too silly sometimes. Jamie Foxx’s Max Dillon is a bit too eccentric to truly pity, but he’s a step up from the very bland comic book version. As Electro, he seems much more interesting when he first appears then the CGI-heavy version later in the film. Harry Osborn’s story arc is extremely rushed. Harry’s story in the Raimi films grew organically through the first two films. Here, they try to accomplish everything in part of a film. They never really establish his character, his friendship with Peter or his reasons for quickly becoming so bloodthirsty. Rhino is completely wasted here, and this wouldn’t be so annoying if he wasn’t so heavily hyped in the promotional material. (In fact, there are quite a few scenes in general and lines of dialog that don’t make it to the final cut.) There’s actually a lack of action, with the best stuff early on, leaving the finale anti-climactic. The final part of the film has some that was expected, but still had more impact than I anticipated. (But, even then, they just kind of move on past one of the moments that I really would’ve like to have seen. Finally, there is a scene during the mid-credits, but it’s just a clip from the upcoming X-Men: Days of Future Past.

*** out of *****

Movie Review: Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Great movie! The story was solid, with just the right amount of twists later in the film. They chose to go with a “political thriller” set within the Marvel Cinematic Universe and it worked beautifully. It tied together nicely threads from “The Avengers,” the first Captain America film and the entire S.H.E.I.L.D. organization. The characters all get their chance to shine, whether it’s dialog, fleshed-out backstories or action sequences. And the action sequences are phenomenal. From the one-on-one fights to the aerial battles, each scene tries to top the last. (There’s about four major action sequences.). There are plenty of nods to other Marvel films and Easter eggs to Marvel characters. There’s also a mid-credit and a post-credit scene to check out. At least stay for the first one, the second isn’t that important if you’re in a rush.

****1/2 out of *****

Movie Review: Non-Stop

Not a bad film, it keeps you guessing throughout. The concept here is pretty good, and I definitely found that every character wasn’t above suspicion. Every time somebody can be ruled out as a suspect, a new twist puts a shadow over their motives. The plot has quite a few hole in it, and it takes a million things to go a certain way for the bad guy’s plan to work. This coupled with a bit of a weak reveal near the end keep this from being a really good movie. Also, although the film’s structure doesn’t really allow it, it would’ve been nice to see more action. This movie could’ve really fallen apart if it wasn’t for Liam Neeson’s acting making his “thinking-man” hero seem plausible.

**1/2 out of *****

Movie Review: RoboCop (2014)

A bit better than I expected, but doesn’t measure up very well with the original “Robocop.” Standing on its own merits, it’s an OK film. There are a couple good action sequences, but nothing that’s very memorable. The plot seems to lose direction late in the film and quickly heads for a subpar conclusion. Gary Oldman has a strong performance as the doctor who helps Alex Murphy transition from man to machine, while Samuel L. Jackson is a bit wasted in his role as a television host, who’s best moment is bleeped out thanks the movie’s PG-13 rating. Where this remake truly fails is how it doesn’t have the same impact as the original. The social satire, dark humor and over the top violence gave the original film character. The newer version is like somebody attempting to retell a raunchy joke and censoring it to the point where it loses its punch. Other thematic elements, such as the sadistic crime boss, murderously corrupt CEO and three “prime directives,” are replaced by a fairly standard crime boss, mildly corrupt CEO and “red asset” wrist bands. Even the fan favorite ED-209 is more a background character. This leads to a less then satisfying climax as the hero isn’t defined by great villains.

**1/2 out of *****