The Most Magnificent Trailer of the Year

I rarely post trailers on here, just because it's hard to gauge a trailer and make an accurate prediction about the movie. There are a few movies coming out this year that have excellent trailers (The Conjuring 2, Central Intelligence, Independence Day: Resurgence, Suicide Squad) but don't necessarily mean that the movies will be all that great.  It's true that I'll probably see all of the aformentioned films, but I can't confidently tell you that they will be great movies.  There are, however, some trailers already this year that are awful that will accurately depict how TERRIBLE these movies will be (The Huntsman: Winter's War, Mother's Day, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows, Warcraft).  However, this is the first trailer I've seen this year that looks FANTASTIC and that I can say, with the utmost confidence, that this movie will be stellar.

In a time when the western is making a helluva resurgence with films like Django Unchained, The Hateful Eight and Bone Tomahawk... this movie will be badass.  I urge you to take two minutes out of your day and watch this epic trailer for the upcoming remake of The Magnificent Seven.

The Boss: I Still Can't Figure Out Why This Was An Actual Movie

I'm a big Melissa McCarthy fan. I think when she's working with someone else's material like Judd Apatow or Paul Feig and she's able to improvise as much as she wants, she can give an audience comedy gold. She's had much success, especially under Feig in comedies that have capable writers (Bridesmaids, The Heat, Spy). But, it's been the couple of films that she's taken her own initiative to either write herself or with her husband that have been kind of duds.  Tammy, a few years ago was one, and now the other is The Boss.  I watched The Boss hoping for a few good laughs dispersed throughout a decent story, but that's not exactly what I got.

The Boss, written by McCarthy, husband, and friend is about a female titan of industry, Michelle Darnell, who is sent to prison for insider trading and all of her assets are auctioned off or sold. So, once she's released from prison, she has nothing and is forced to live with her former assistant, Claire (Kristen Bell). From there, she spends her time wallowing in self-pity and looking for a way to climb back to the top. She takes Claire's daughter to an off-brand Girl Scout meeting and decides that's her way. She takes Claire's delicious brownie recipe and begins her own troops who sell these brownies. She climbs back to the top and yada yada yada.

The good: Well, I can say that it's definitely not a terrible movie. I didn't ever want to walk out and demand my money back.  There are a few separate instances, too, when McCarthy goes off on a hateful, profanity-laden rant toward someone that seriously provides a significant amount of chuckles. There's also Kristen Bell who is absolutely adorable (which is the case in almost everything she's in), though she's a bit under-used. The feud between Michelle and the mother of a scout is also another element that's ripe with comedy.

The bad: Pretty much everything else. I wasn't so much upset that I watched the film, I was more confused as to why it was even a film. McCarthy and co. wrote the movie meaning that it came from an idea that wasn't immediately scrapped. One of the three had the idea and loved it so much they spent countless amounts of time and money writing it, casting it, filming it, promoting it and everything else that goes into making a movie. But, the story is so blah that I just can't believe anyone went for it. There was no real message. There was no real purpose. It's just a bland idea that without the attachment of McCarthy would've been hucked into the wastebasket of some intern reading for a mid-level production company.  Had I written the same script back in college and submitted it for peer review, it would've been torn up.

I think what happened that made it such a mess is that, other than the entire concept for the story that is more vanilla that fat-free yogurt, is that there were a lot of comedic misfires. Peter Dinklage is cast as Darnell's rival and ex-lover and it's supposed to be just funny that he's small and used to bang Michelle and that he's into karate. But, it's not funny. It's sloppy.  Dinklage can be very funny, but people need to start writing him better comedic roles than he's been given (I'm looking at you hard Pixels). Then, there's also the rivalry of the regular off-brand girl scouts with Darnell's off-off-brand girl scouts that just screams lazy writing.  And there's even a scene with Kathy Bates as Darnell's mentor that looks like it could've been a laugh riot, but was edited down for time and essentially just disregarded as a moment of comedy.

I still like McCarthy and I have big hopes for Ghostbusters, but The Boss was definitely a misfire that I think most movie-goers could kind of tell from the trailer. It doesn't set me back as a fan of her work, because she truly is one of the greats of our time, but they all can't be winners. A lot of comedians who write their own work do very well (Will Ferrell, Seth Rogen, Steve Carrell, etc.) and there's comedians who do better when someone else has written the work for them (Jim Carrey, Ben Stiller, and now, it seems Melissa McCarthy).

C-

London Has Fallen: Yipee Ki-Yay Guv'na

There's something very underrated about R-rated action movies. They're very few and far between but they don't get the love they deserve.  In an age where action means PG-13 Marvel, it's the CGI that's impressive, not necessarily the action. While it's kind of difficult to plug violence in film, in R-rated action the creativity lies in the kills. Look at Die Hard and The Matrix and Bad Boys and True Lies and Crank and Dredd and any number of 90s Nic Cage movies (Face/Off, The Rock, Con Air) and the fun lies in the balls-to-the-wall action sequences and inventive kills. Right now, with studios wanting to cash in as much as they can with a wider audience, PG-13 is the most bankable. And instead of writing cool action death scenes, they're figuring out "creative" ways to make the violence seem more real without shedding a drop of blood. This, to be honest, is not something one should intentionally seek out, but fans of good action do appreciate a nice kill with a snappy one-liner. Olympus Has Fallen had that... and London Has Fallen has done it even better.

Since you never saw Olympus Has Fallen, it might be a wonder how the film even warranted a sequel (it didn't). The first film saw a terrorist takeover of the white house and John McClane Secret Service Agent Mike Banning (Gerard Butler) crawling through the rafters taking out the terrorist one by one bloody kill at a time to rescue the President (Aaron Eckhart). London Has Fallen takes place three years later when the Prime Minister of London has died of complications from surgery and all the world leaders show up for the funeral. Only, the funeral has been sabotaged by terrorists seeking to take out all the world leaders. The only one they haven't gotten to is... yup... the President (Aaron Eckhart) who sticks closely by his number one Secret Service Agent John McClane Mike Banning (Gerard Butler).

It's your typical sequel that stages a plot very similar to the original. However, I like what they did with this one.  In the first film, the President was held hostage the entire film and Agent Banning was maneuvering his way through the White House to save him. In this one, the President isn't captured, but the only leader left alive forced to fight next to his former/present savior. Butler is a very good choice for this role and is charismatic as all hell, even channeling his inner Bruce Willis. His kills are creative and brutal and most of his quippy one liners after he's wasted a baddie are on point. It's a shame that he's just not a bankable actor as of yet. The role honestly would've been perfect for a 90s Willis, or Schwarzenegger, or even a current Liam Neeson. But, Butler has yet to establish himself as someone you're willing to drop the bucks on since 300.

What I liked about the film is that it knows exactly what it wants to be.  It's an homage to the great 80s and 90s action films and doesn't take itself seriously at all. I mean, hell, within the film Butler utters BOTH LINES "I'll be back" AND "Get to the chopper". It's a beautiful call back to the action films of yore. If it's only been like twenty years can I say yore? It's very self-aware and the action is unrelenting that transcends guilty pleasure. It's also just a fun, dumb, action film that forces the audience to recall B-movie basic cable 80s Charles Bronson flick that its target audience will love.

The downside to the film is there is a huge misfire in its somewhat ridiculous political agenda.  The film comes off as racist and extremely xenophobic, but if one turns one's brain off for the film then it won't bother you as much as it should. The preposterous ending and backwards message (where America is the best country in the world, yet they're trigger happy xenophobes that don't learn any lesson no matter how much the evidence is staring them in the face #MERICA) may hold back viewers from having a decent time. And, there's also the unbelievably horrendous digital effects. Like, clearly, this film didn't have a massive budget and everything they spent the money on was actors and bullets, so the few explosions in the film are so bad they wouldn't even pass off as a video game cut screen (the first one had this problem also).  But, that's not what the film relies on. It relies on good ole' Banning with his gun an his knife, offing foreign henchmen and spewing out (probably half-unintentionally) hilarious one-liners.

I can only hope that if they make one more Die Hard, it's as much fun as this movie.

B

The Jungle Book: A Lot More Than Just The Bare Necessities

Okay, so I get that we're very swiftly starting to eliminate any and all original ideas being made into feature films. It's been coming for a few years now.  First everything was based off a book... which was okay because nobody reads anymore. Then, it was starting to be based off of comic books... which was okay because it was cool to see how these hand-drawn animated characters played out in real life on the screen.  Then it was sequels to comic book movies.  Then it was more and more sequels to the original ideas and/or the based off a book ideas.  Then it was remakes of older movies. Remakes of newer movies. Reboots of remakes of older and newer movies that were either based off a book or a comic book or a book sequel or a comic book prequel reboot. Whatever. It's exhausting complaining about it so much. Disney has come up with its own plan (other than bankrupt the rest of the world by owning the Star Wars franchise now).  They're taking their old cartoons that were so successful and turning them live action (Alice in Wonderland, Cinderella, Maleficent).  The Jungle Book is the next entry of a long line of live-action old Disney cartoons that will be coming out (Pete's Dragon, Beauty and the Beast, Dumbo, Mulan, Winnie the Pooh, The Sword in the Stone, Peter Pan).  There's no more originality even at Disney anymore, folks. However, I can say this... if any of these future films are as great and beautiful as The Jungle Book... it may cease my complaining all together.

The Jungle Book is a sight to see. It's almost like when everyone lost their minds for Avatar (even though now we can all admit, no one has watched it again since theaters and no one gives remotely even one shit about the just-announced four sequels to it). An entire world was created that we'd never before seen on screen.  It was entirely computer generated and it was one of the most gorgeous spectacles of my movie-going days.  It was, however, used as a bit of a crutch in order to distract from the very mundane plot and lifeless acting. The Jungle Book took away what was great from Avatar and succeeded in every way that Avatar failed. Granted, the source material was a lot stronger, but this movie also had a lot more to live up to. The Jungle Book is a beloved Disney cartoon and there was a very fine line director Jon Favreau had to walk between appeasing his audience and improving upon the cartoon. And mostly, all of the decisions made in the film were improvements. The Jungle Book did almost everything right.

So, just like the cartoon we begin with Mowgli, a man cub, raised by wolves and mentored by panther, Bagheera (Ben Kingsley).  Except this time, there's the added conflict of a dry jungle where the animals must set aside their differences and instinct of murderous animal rage, in order to adhere to a water truce (a truce set in place whenever the water levels are so low, the animals must share it in harmony or face extinction). There, is where tiger Shere Kahn (Idris Elba) discovers the man cub and swears once the rains return to end his life. This forces Mowgli's wolf parents Akela (Breaking Bad's Giancarlo Esposito) and Raksha (Lupita Nyong'o) to decide if he should be returned to the man village or not. Mowgli, fearing for the lives of his wolf family, decides on his own to go.  Bagheera accompanies him. This, however, does not stop Shere Kahn from seeking out the boy in order to kill him. Along the way to the man village, Mowgli meets Jungle Book fan favorite Baloo (Bill Murray), a trickster snake Kaa (Scarlette Johannson) and a gigantic ape, King Louie (Christopher Walken) each of whom have their own selfish motivations on how to use the boy.

Each segment of the film is more awe-inducing than the last. You'll sit there and chuckle at the silly animal characters that each have their own quirk, but forget that what you're watching is entirely computer generated. Obviously, the most fun in the film is when Mowgli meets up with Baloo and they form a sort-of strange, but exciting friendship.  And really, my only true criticism with the film is that Baloo felt underused. He's introduced a little later than the original, and his time with Mowgli feels a lot more rushed than the original. (I can also complain that they didn't have the 'so what we gonna do today' vultures in this one... but I'll let it slide). Bill Murray was the absolute perfect choice for Baloo, as he's the film's comic relief and Murray does an excellent job of playing Baloo, not so much as a bear, but as a sloth in a bear suit.

Newcomer Neel Sethi plays Mowgli.  He's good. He is good, so let's get that out there. But, he's still a kid actor.  There have been films where I've been blown away by the acting chops of a little kid, and this wasn't really one of them.  He still rushes some of his lines and there are moments when you realize you're watching a kid actor instead of a character.  However, for being legitimately the only human person on screen the entire movie, he's able to do a decent job with it. Christopher Walken was a perfect choice for King Louie as was everyone else cast as their designated animal. Shere Kahn has never been more terrifying.

Almost all of the old favorite moments from the original film have been reproduced here in a way that it feels earned and not just a callback to make you smile (again, you could've had the damn vultures). The best songs from the original come into play as well.  However, there are a few specific and notable changes to the story.  It was definitely a little risky on Favreau's part to change the story in these ways, but lucky for him, he had a good writer working with him and they were able to improve up on the story. The ending of this film is a different from the cartoon, and I actually appreciated this ending a lot more.

The Jungle Book is one of those movies (and since we're getting closer to summer, I'm going to probably be saying this a lot) that you need to get to the big screen to see.  I didn't see it in 3D because screw that I will not see anything in 3D anymore.  However, I've heard from a few credible sources that the 3D is worth it.  I didn't see it in 3D and I enjoyed it fine.  Whatever medium you choose to watch it in... just see it in theaters.  The theater I was in had screaming babies, loudly-talking children, and tiny feet kicking the back of my uncomfortable chair... and it still didn't ruin the experience for this film  It's fantastic.

A-

Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice: Occam's Razor Dulled

-Written by guest reviewer Drew Boudreau

I had the privilege of seeing Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice several days after its debut, marked by critical destruction. I am, among my group of movie goers, the forgiving one. I liked X-Men 3 and I liked The Dark Knight Rises despite some problems here and there. If there is a movie that everyone else craps upon, I usually hold it close, stroke its head, and whisper down next to its shivering, tear-laden head 'Shhh...shhh...it's ok...they're just being fanboys...you're not bad.' Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice was too difficult to like. I tried to like it. I tried to hold its hand and see things from its point of view. But it wasn't the subject matter. It was the continued choice of otherwise competent characters making outlandish and ignorant choices in the face of simple situations to further the contrived story.

The whole premise of this movie is that Lex Luthor wants Batman and Superman to fight, just for funsies, so he frames Superman for the murder of some (American?) soldiers in the desert, where Superman is saving girlfriend Lois Lane. The soldiers are all killed by the machine guns of Lex Luthor. So...the feds never went to the scene of the crime to see how their soldiers were killed? Never did an autopsy, never even saw the bodies? Nope. Strike 1.

Batman, the great detective, believes Superman to be a threat to the planet, based on the events that occurred in Man of Steel.  So he foregoes all detective work and instead makes a plan to kill him, with no further investigation. Strike 2.

When the battle does begin, Batman is armed with Kryptonite weapons that he fires at Superman. Superman recovers, and Batman fires again. Again, Superman recovers. Superman just forgets he can end this all by flying at warp one-gillion with Batman in tow and telling him that Luthor is using him. Strike 3.

Batman is winning the fight nearly the entire time, in a blind killing rage, gleefully punishing Superman (again, we're still not sure why) and as he's about the strike the death blow, Superman mentions his own mother's name, which happens to also be Batman's mother's name. In that one moment, Batman changes course entirely, and decides to be Superman's new BFF. Once again, he has asked no questions or done any research into whether Superman is telling the truth or not, not what his intentions might be. So far, Guy Noir puts this guy to shame in the detective department. Strike, what is that, 4?

Let me take this moment to also explain how this movie shoots itself in the foot with a sawed-off shotgun. It attempts to paint a dark, realistic picture of modern city life in Gotham and Metropolis. It opens '18 months' after the Man of Steel fight that completely wiped out downtown Metropolis--and the whole city is rebuilt. To put this fairy-tale number in perspective, I went to visit Ground Zero in March of 2003, and there was still rubble from the two skyscrapers that fell, that were being cleaned up. It took 10+ years to even begin planning of the Freedom Tower. And in Metropolis, the equivalent of the entirety of midtown Manhattan was sacked and burnt, and it's back to normal in a year and half. That's two strikes right there. 6, I think.

Now to the subject I liked the least, and like talking about the least as well. Jessie Eisenberg. I have never seen worse film acting in a big budget movie. He plays Lex Luthor as disturbed, paranoid and giddy with unstable evil plots. Unfortunately, he also plays him with all the skill of a high school student taking his first acting class who thinks anyone can play Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight.  I cannot figure out if director Zack Snyder had a clause that said he wasn't allowed to direct Eisenberg, or if he just wasn't allowed to fire him. I have to believe it's the second. When you see this film, you'll realize how hard it is to play a mental affliction with nuance. Three more strikes for Eisenberg. The side is retired.

The visual aspects of the movie are fantastic, as are the first few minutes of the film, seeing the ending of the Man of Steel from Gotham, just across the river.  All the actors, sans Eisenberg, give engaging and full performances, including Ben Affleck, Henry Cavill, Laurence Fishbourne, Amy Adams, and Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman (whose extremely brief screen time was absolutely nailed).  However, there is an awkward moment when Cavill and Affleck are meeting for the first time, and the energy in the theatre peaks, until Eisenberg joins them and it's like watching the guy who won the walk-on role join the real actors. (In the same scene, Luthor says to Bruce Wayne he is glad he finally got Bruce into Metropolis. The billionaire businessman has never ventured into the biggest city in the country? One more strike. Team forfeit.)

There are far more script flaws I could go into, but I get no satisfaction ripping on a movie. I hope this was just birthing pains, a necessary plot device to enable the launch of the Justice League movies, which I also hope meet success. But this film shows you that the necessity of a plot device (Batman and Superman have to fight!) will make good screenwriters create dumb narratives, and otherwise smart heroes useless when it matters most.

C-

Editor's Note: Though I didn't see the film, and have no intention of seeing it (yes, that probably makes me a bad critic, but I refuse to see Douche Snyder wreck the only superhero [Batman] I still give a shit about), I feel this clip from the incredibly underrated 90s film 'Angus' accurately sums up why Superman is a terrible character:

 

Zootopia: An Important Movie, Especially Now

Disney and Pixar have been the be-all end-all for animated films. Pixar has had a long standing reputation that holds itself to the highest quality of family-friendly animated film. It has breached said reputation only a few times. And, even still, it wasn't enough for movie goers to disqualify the Pixar name. Last year's Inside Out was spectacular and had way more emotionally thematic layers than any animated movie should. But, Pixar gives a shit about people and telling a story that actually means something. It's almost guaranteed with Pixar.  Look at other production companies and the animated movies they put out the last two years: Minions, Hotel Transylvania 2, Alvin and the Chipmunks 4, Rio 2, Planes, The Nut Job.  Yes, not all non-Disney/Pixar movies are bad.  There's some hidden gems (like The Lego Movie), but it appears Pixar has the monopoly on well-rounded, fun, emotionally taut, fantastic family animated films.  Then, a branch of Disney started making their own animated films separate from Pixar and they've been nothing less than stellar: Tangled, Frozen, Big Hero 6, Wreck-it Ralph, and now Zootopia. I say this with zero hyperbole: Zootopia may be the best animated film I've ever seen.

We begin with Judy Hopps, a teeny-tiny bunny rabbit with big dreams of leaving her podunk bunny town and moving to Zootopia to become a police officer. She's tiny (and don't call her cute), but she's got a ton of heart. She finishes top of her class and finds her way to Zootopia where she isn't taken seriously and is put on parking duty. There, she meets a con-artist fox, Nick, who winds up being an important ally in an on-going missing persons case within the city. Judy has to prove herself, not just to her gruff police chief, but to the entire city that thinks a tiny little bunny won't amount to anything more than a carrot farmer. And while the film follows Judy and Nick in their attempt to solve the case, it really isn't about that. The heart of the film is a beautiful message of racial equality. Judging one another based on stereotypes (a bunny could never be a cop, a fox can never be anything but a predator) and a serious commentary about said equality, especially now.  Racial tensions in this country have always been high and it's forever going to be an embarrassing stain on our country's history, but it's films like Zootopia that has the opportunity to open ignorant eyes in 2016 which is something very powerful.

Racial inequality is not the only embarrassing aspect of being an American... especially right now with a few specific candidates running for President on a platform of nothing but mere hate. When Donald Trump wants to ban all Muslims or build a wall separating this country and Mexico, and he's still the favorite to be the Republican nominee... something is seriously wrong. Zootopia was released in the perfect time to be able to add the ongoing dialogue of the pervasive problems surrounding our American culture and society and the way we treat others who are different than us. The way we lump all Muslims together when it's a religion of peace and a few radical terrorist groups have been able to successfully exploit the religion's name is appalling, but not surprising in this country.  We are a people who base our lives around what we fear. If that brown dude wearing that tarp thing on his head is sitting next to you on a plane-- do you immediately think he has a bomb?  And yes, racism itself is never going to end, but when pieces of art like Zootopia can get ignorant brains to start working again... it may actually make a difference in the lives a few people.

This wasn't meant to be turned into some preachy rant... and that's what's great about the movie-- it's got a strong message without being preachy. It's not exactly subtle in its message, but if you're not looking for one, it might be easy to overlook. Whatever the case may be, it's a fun, fantastic, funny, and important film, especially now, that everyone should see. Whether you're a fan of animated films or not-- this is one to take anyone you know to.  Especially kids.  Let's cut the hate while they're young.

A

10 Cloverfield Lane: Like If The Chick From Room Never Got Out Mixed With War of the Worlds

First off, do yourself a favor and STOP watching any and all trailers for this movie. I saw the initial trailer back in late January and that was it for me.  I avoided everything else so that I could go into the film as blindly as possible. And it made a difference. Secondly, do everything in your power to separate the original film from this one as best as possible. The first one was a nice little surprise, but it suffers re-watch value because of its use of the incredibly tired 'found footage' trope. It would be a near-perfect monster movie if we didn't have to follow around the film with a shaky cam and the quippy voice of, now famous, TJ Miller. 10 Cloverfield Lane doesn't really have much to do with the original, but believe me when I say... it's definitely a Cloverfield-esque ride. I know it's only March, but this is the best movie of the year so far.

I'm not going to do much of a plot breakdown because, like I said, you should go into the film with as little knowledge as possible. What you've seen on the original trailer is this: Melissa (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) is trapped in an underground bunker, with a broken leg handcuffed to the rail and her captor Howard (John freakin' Goodman) is a sinister dude who may or may not be completely insane.  There's also another dude there with a broken arm named Emmett (John Gallagher, Jr.).  Melissa was in a car crash and saved by Howard before a global "attack" which forced him to lock them inside said bunker where they can't leave for at least a couple of years. Initially Melissa doesn't believe a word the socially inept Howard says, but things start to happen that send her questioning if she was actually kidnapped or if the hell she's in currently is not as bad as the hell happening outside.

It's a great concept for a wonderful hybrid film.  This easily could've been a standalone kidnapping film without any of the Cloverfield alien stuff lurking in the back of your mind, because the scenes with Melissa, Emmett and Howard are the best moments of the film. They're tense, they're frightening, and they're the most gut-churning. We all know John Goodman as the lovable dad and here he's anything but. He's a nutty conspiracy theorist who doesn't know how to interact with other humans. He'll say something that leads you to believe that he's a murderous killing psychopath and the next, he'll be friendly and you'll wonder if it's all in your head (like Melissa does the ENTIRE film).  It's a brilliant character played brilliantly by a brilliant actor. It's almost uncomfortable watching Goodman portray this, at the very least, Aspbergers'd up nutjob.  It's a terrifying little puzzle you're trying to put together all the while having flashes in your mind remembering that this is still a Cloverfield movie so literally anything can happen.

This film has strong writing that benefits strong characters. Goodman, who switches back from villain to hero to villain again is only so good because his character was written so complexly. Melissa is a great strong, female character.  Never once is she damsel in distress.  From the moment she wakes up chained to a pipe, she's got a plan.  She doesn't sit and cry about it, she's ready to get the hell out of there. Every character turn Howard makes, Melissa has a plan.  Every time it appears he's docile and telling the truth, she's still ready for anything. Even better is they don't try to have some sort of forced romance between her and Emmett.  This movie knows what it is and it doesn't deviate.

So, having spoiled nothing for you, hopefully you understand how original and how creative this movie actually is. There's something here that you will like and if you're a fan of consistently feeling nervous throughout a film, this one will knock you on your ass. I still can't get over how great this movie was and it was filmed in secret. No one knew it existed until the trailer leaked online a few months ago.  What a refreshing treat. I love that it takes the concept of movie monster and breaks it down a few ways: yes, it's Cloverfield so you're already under the assumption that there will be a monster, but there's also Goodman's monster.  He's a monster that may or may not actually be a monster. It's a perfect metaphor. Stop watching previews for this movie, stop reading reviews for it, and go see the film. Just thank the Lord it wasn't a found footage movie.  It's awesome.

A