I Am Number Four

 Okay, so this film gets mixed feelings from me.  Can I say it is a well rounded film?  No.  Can I say all the acting was consistent? No.  Can I say I still enjoyed it?  For some reason, yeah, I can.

I Am Number Four is about, essentially, a boy (Alex Pettyfer) from another planet that is sent to earth as a precaution.  He is number four of nine people left over from his home planet, and being one of those nine, he has special abilities or powers. If that wasn't enough, he is being hunted down by an enemy clan that wiped out most of their people.  So now he has to lay low on earth among everyone else and try to live his life as normally as possible.  Little does he know who he'll meet and how they'll change his life forever.
Dramatic enough for you?

Side note: I swear, sometimes I feel just ridiculous summarizing some of these movies. 

Anyways, to start, let me just point out that this film is based on the novel by the same name.  The wonderful thing about this is that the film is open ended, and as I predict, so is the book.  It leaves you expecting continuation because the story is really incomplete.  However, there are no sequels written in book form and lord knows how long it takes for those to come out.  So my concern is, by the time the second book is written, and the second film is created, how relevant will the story be to our generation?  How dedicated will the fans be, to still anticipate it?  And how old will the actors look by that time?  And for argument sake, let's say that they decide to make the second film without a book to follow.  How pathetic will the attempt be?  How smooth will the transition in thought, imagination and writing seem?  These are just a few concerns for the future of the soon to be franchise.

But enough about these observations.  Let's get back to the movie shall we?

I like the idea of the story.  It's enticing in a way.  I mean, where can you go wrong with a hot male lead, a romantic interest, supernatural power and strength, action and adventure?  Well, apparently in several places.

The thing that bothered me the most was the weak romantic element.  Pettyfer's character pretty much obsesses over Agron's character immediately, but their wasn't enough pull for it to be convincing.  The lines were extremely predictable and cheesy, to the point where I had the urge to laugh.  That's definitely not a good thing.  I'm somewhat of a sap, so it doesn't take much usually.  But they just didn't reach me with that romantic relationship.  Ironically, they are dating in real life: a nice tidbit for you guys.  With some better writing maybe they could have pulled it off.  As for the action, it definitely overcompensated for the romance.  But for me, it was also what saved the film.  I really enjoyed the battle scenes and the bad ass Number Six played by Teresa Palmer.  I also loved the soundtrack, the way they applied it to the scenes and used the popular music of right now.  
Overall the acting was decent.  Nothing was horrible, but there were weak parts here and there.

The entire time watching, I felt as though there was some vital information being left out.  Like, details in the book they didn't find time to include.  There were a lot of things not explained properly, and explanation is necessary, especially if is this is considered sci-fi.  Just look at The Matrix.  Just imagine where that movie would be without the detail of explanation. If they fixed the romance and the detail, I would have been one happy gal.

A few shout outs, to the evil guys and their makeup artists- good job (thumbs up).  And I'd like to thank the adorable beagle dog in the film for making it a little bit more enjoyable.  Here's to his adorable self!

Finally, I say, see this film for some action, some adventure, some good times, some inner laughs.  Just don't hold your breath for the second installment.  I give this film 6/10.

Just Go With It

Hey guys, sorry for the little break there; life just gets in the way sometimes.  But I'm back!

So, let's get started.  It's a strange time in the film industry right now.  It's the time when the Oscar jewels start to fade away and the traditional blockbuster films take in their fifteen minutes of fame on the screen.  We, therefore, have to let go of our high expectations, coming down from the cloud nine of films and entering a more earthy, faulty tradition of blockbuster movies.  And I have to say, it felt like quite the fall.    

Just Go With It is a perfect example of a film that I hate to enjoy.  If you were to look at it in comparison to the Oscar nominated films, it looks like a mediocre attempt at entertainment.  However, most would not bother to compare it like this, because it's like comparing apples and oranges.  Therefore, we have to completely forget how amazing movies can be and how creative they can become, in order to fairly critique this movie.

I'm going to give it a try, but I make no promises.
First and foremost, the plot of the film follows the life of a plastic surgeon named Danny (Adam Sandler) who wears a fake wedding ring in order to lure women into sleeping with him.  When his magnificent plan goes awry - when he actually wants a relationship with one of the women - he convinces his assistant (Jennifer Aniston) to play his soon-to-be-ex-wife in order to keep up with the charade and to keep the girl.  Little does he know the truth of his own feelings until he finally realizes who he really loves.

I think my main issue with this film was the unrealistic speed and acceptance of the events.  It's similar to The Green Hornet, in that sense.  If you're going to base your film in an "ordinary" world with "ordinary" people, reactions need to be somewhat believable, relatable and, most importantly, realistic.  If I can't buy in to what you're trying to sell me, then you haven't done your job.  Within the first fifteen minutes of the film, we get some of Danny's past, his present and his want for the future.  He falls in love with the girl (Brooklyn Decker) over one night, lies to her in an instant and convinces his assistant to do these ridiculous things in the next instant.  I just felt like there was not enough convincing. 
I felt like Aniston's character was a women without a backbone, or strong sense of self.  She was never really upset when the occasion called for her to be, she was never really frustrated when the occasion called for her to be, and she was never really in love when the occasion called for her to be.  She was always happy-go-lucky and accepting of everything, even when it involved her children.

I want to be clear: this isn't a critique on her acting or how she played the role.  It is rather, a critique on the writing and the direction.  Aniston did her part, but the makers of this film didn't really think her character through. They didn't give her a lot to work with.  She played an "on the surface" sort of character that had no depth.  In fact, all the actors played their roles much the same.  I don't know if this is a comedy genre sort of thing to do, or just a weakness of the film.  I have seen hilarious comedies with much more whole characters then this one.  I am lead to believe that the makers of this film were looking for a financial quick fix and didn't put much thought into anything.  They just threw together an outrageous story one afternoon, picked the famous actors that would draw in an audience, and shot the scenes in a tropical location within a few months. No second thought, no consideration, just lure the audience in so that they can bring in some money.

That may be a harsh assessment, but there it is.
Now, to shift gears somewhat, the acting was fine.  Adam Sandler was pretty funny as always (right in his comfort zone), Jennifer Aniston was better than usual (she felt more comfortable/ more natural in her acting), the kids played by Bailee Madison and Griffin Gluck were impressive for their ages.  Nick Swardson's fake accent was extremely funny.  I thought the comedy itself was just that: light and funny.

So, ultimately, I would say go out and enjoy this film for a light chuckle and a brief smile of content.  If you're like me and have trouble enjoying films without properly formed characters, then I don't recommend it.  However, if you don't mind - don't expect too much, just enjoy the show.

I give this film a 5.5/10 for retrieving a few chuckles, but not really making any impression on me.  

The Green Hornet

To be clear, I didn't have high expectations for this film.  And it's a good thing that I didn't.

This film is about the heir of an empire named Britt Reid (Seth Green) who inherits his father's business when he dies from a mysterious allergic reaction to a bee sting.  Reid meets his father's assistant Kato (Jay Chou) and together they fight crime under the mask of criminals.    

The problem that really stood out to me in this movie was the speed of the film, where the move from event to event was completely rushed instead of gradual.  This bothered me to no extent. That is exactly how you do a disservice to all the fans of the comic.  This movie must have been under serious time restraints, because how else could you explain the rush?  Everything happened so conveniently; Kato so willing to agree to Reid's ridiculous plans, Kato being an engineer that has nothing better to do than create crime fighting weapons and machines and designs for heroes, both of them being amazing fighters out of nowhere.  It was all so convenient and unrealistic.

The writing was complete crap.  I'm sorry to be so harsh, but it was.  You could tell that Rogen was relying completely on his facial expressions and his exaggeration in the line delivery, which just ended up over compensating for the crappy lines.  I found that Rogen's character was an arrogant prick, which I understand is the point, but is it not also the point to have some sort of redeeming quality?  I found none in Rogen's interpretation.  I actually preferred Chou's way of playing Kato then Rogen's way of playing Reid.

Cameron Diaz did nothing for me in her acting, in her character, or in being any sort of addition to the film.

If I were to summarize this film in one word it would be amateur.  When a film has to reference Twilight you know something's wrong.  I rolled my eyes so fast, as a knee jerk reaction.  We have come into a new age for comic books turned movies.  The stories are taken more seriously, more dramatically, and much more hardcore.  This film only brought it back 20 years.  Get with the times people!

The only scene I actually enjoyed was the very beginning with James Franco as one of the bad guys.  He is hilarious as always and it brought me back to Pineapple Express with both Franco and Rogen.  It also reminded me that it was Franco who made that movie what it was and how weak Rogen is as a single entity.

I give this film 5.8/10 for simply trying to turn a comic that's never been done before into movie form - but basically failing.        

No Strings Attached

 

So I'm fully aware that a lot of people may not like my assessment of this film, but I can't help but feel unimpressed.  

This film is about two old friends that simply use each other for sex without any relationship obligations. The two, Emma (Natalie Portman) and Adam (Ashton Kutcher), discover their real feelings for each other even though they try to maintain this "no strings attached" facade.  

From the very beginning of the film, it is quite obvious that Adam will be the attached one who wants more than just sex and Emma will be the one with serious commitment issues.  Now, the thing that I felt was seriously left out, was why Emma was the one with the issues.  They clearly show you Adam's screwed up relationship with his father and lack of a mother authority.  But they barely touch upon Emma's familial history.  Yet she is the one who can't commit.  Why?  It isn't explained.  It's barely touched upon.  Even when she finally talks to her mother, the explanation doesn't seem worthy of Emma's fear.  It's almost as if the writers figured they needed something about Emma and just threw the scene in for five minutes to placate the audience.  It wasn't deep rooted and I didn't sympathize in any way for Emma.  

     

Portman was bland in her comedy scenes as well.  Every time she cursed I felt like she was apologizing to God in her head for the blasphemy.  It wasn't convincing at all.  Also, Portman was supposed to play the in command woman in their relationship and I didn't really feel the power from her.  It felt more like she was saying the words,  but she wasn't really feeling them.  This makes sense when she actually loves him and wants to turn him away, but in the beginning of the sex relationship, even then, she didn't have the power in her.  I think that would have been very important at least in the beginning.

On a more positive note with Portman, she did the emotional scenes decently, as did Ashton Kutcher.  He never completely stands out to me however - there was something missing in his attachment.  I couldn't pin point exactly what it was, maybe more heart perhaps, I don't know.  Let's just say I won't be swooning after him anytime soon.  And that is vital for a romantic male lead.  Look back on the P.S. I Love You days.  I still love Gerard Butler and Jeffrey Dean Morgan, so much so, that I want to go to Ireland and find one for myself, as unrealistic as that is.   

As for the dialogue, nothing original, definitely forced vulgarity and some cheesy lines.  "If you come any closer I'll never let you go."  I didn't buy it.  It also doesn't help when your sitting beside some very obnoxious girls saying things out loud to the screen like "Kiss him!" or "Oh my gosh this is too cute for me to handle!"  All I could think was, shoot me now.  And I'm not exaggerating on what they said.      

Ultimately, this film was common.  The kind of film you see yourself saying "eh" as you shrug your shoulders.  Not worth seeing twice.
So if you want a one night stand with this film, never to be looked back on, then I recommend it as a light romantic comedy, that does the job for one night of distraction.   

I give this film 6.8/10 for keeping me distracted for about 2 hours.

Blue Valentine

I sat through this film in vain, hoping for some heightened romantic element that gives the girls and guys of the world a little hope.  When it started out somewhat melancholy, I thought -okay, I'm sure it'll pick up.  Suffice it to say, I felt horribly deceived.

Why would this movie deceive me, you might ask.  Well, instead of displaying a romance for the ages, or even a relationship that has meaning, it left me with a familiar sadness; a cynical one that I know all to well and that I don't need to be reminded of.

And that is: the fear of repeating your parents mistakes, marrying someone who shows you no respect or human decency, feeling trapped and limited from your dreams and ambitions.  And that is exactly what this film gives you.  The breakdown of their marriage is one thing, but the coming together of their marriage was a complete other.  It's like they had half the film figured out (the depressing half) and half the film in disarray (the romantic foundation).   
 
For a proper breakdown of the film: It's about a couple named Dean (Ryan Gosling) and Cindy (Michelle Williams), where we follow their lives together over several years, cross cutting scenes, with the beginning of their relationship to the end of it. 

The thing that bothered me the most about this film was the lack of romantic chemistry between Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling during the formation or their relationship.  It seemed almost juvenile and careless in its execution, making me think that Williams' character is basically a slut and Gosling's character was simply looking out for sexual opportunity.  They try to smooth this over with cheesy lines like "I felt like I knew her...",  when Dean glances at Cindy in the hallway.  It just felt like they were trying so hard to make this film a certain way (a melancholic, rugged, dark, sexual and disturbed) kind of way, that it felt forced after a while.  Which explains why they got the "depressed marriage" scenes down.  They were so in tune with their inevitable fate that they did an excellent job of playing two very confused  individuals in a marriage trap.

Now, I'm not saying that the acting wasn't excellent.  It was.  Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling do a great job with their roles, for the tone of the film.  It was the tone, however, that had me struggling.  There were just some scenes that such a tone shouldn't be used; like when they are falling in love, for example. It just didn't add anything to the film.  So what I guess I'm saying is, the tone should have had more variation.
But Gosling's physical change throughout the movie was very good.  It was very realistic to me, which I liked.  His hair receding and his belly jutting out the way it did, made the time periods in which he is shown, really stand out.  This made the cut scenes easy to follow.

One last thing to point out is their little girl.  The idea was supposed to be surrounding her, I think, and the fact that she is what came out of their love and they do everything they can to protect her.  However, other than the obvious, I didn't completely feel the connection with their daughter.  They were so wrapped up in themselves for most of the film, she more or less became obsolete.  The little girl was played more as a pawn who was only acknowledged when the occasion called for it, rather than a true commodity to the parents who have to constantly consider her.  I just didn't feel the parental dynamic as I should have.   

But looking at the film as a whole, I acknowledge that my personal preference is seriously coming into play.  I realize that all the elements that make a good film need to be looked at and that this film has most of them.  But unfortunately, it's just not my kind of movie.        

I give this film 8/10 for its acting, its purpose, but for lacking slightly in its execution of the overall tone of the movie.

Country Strong

The first thing I have to say about this film is, it's not for everybody.
Some may say that it's slow moving, predictable, and somewhat repetitive.  More obviously, if you're not a fan of country music, it would most definitely come off boring.  But then, there are those who would say it's a movie that has the capabilities of being a guilty pleasure.  

So to fill you guys in, here's a breakdown of the plot.  A country music star named Kelly Canter (played by Gwyneth Paltrow) hits rock bottom and ends up in rehab.  However, due to the demands of her career, she is prematurely taken out of rehab for a comeback tour.  The film follows her struggle to get back to normal, as well as following the lives of those around her, such as her husband (Tim McGraw), and her opening acts (Leighton Meester and Garret Hedlund).
As a nice tid-bit for you guys, apparently Kelly Canter's character was written with Britney Spears' life as inspiration.  Spears' struggles resembles Canter's in the film.   

Now, to move on.  About 70% of this film shows us Canter's continuous downward spiral that seems to only get worse and worse.  After a while you think; we get the point, she has a lot of baggage.  That's where the repetition comes in. Something happens and she loses it, something else happens and she loses it.  Get the idea?

Then there is the issue of her husbands character.  Tim McGraw especially surprised me.  I was pretty impressed with him when it comes to his acting, however, his character tries to claim sympathy from the audience and fails miserably.  Being the one who takes her out of rehab way too early, he takes little responsibility for the consequences.  I didn't necessarily disagree with the way they portrayed this.  In celebrity life, I can imagine how many times this type of thing happens.  Especially from people who claim to love and care for them.    

Now the reason for this film being a guilty pleasure is all because of Garrett Hedlund.  He makes you swoon after his rescue missions, his blue eyes and his deep musical voice.  I enjoyed him the most for his acting and his character.  And the music.  I enjoyed the songs; they were well sung and kinda catchy.

Leighton Meester was kinda pointless to me.  I mean I understand why she was in the film; out with the old, in with the new.  When I say she was pointless, I mean she didn't make any sort of impression on me.  I didn't love her character or her acting.  She was just okay.  When you're just okay, it's worse than being horrible.  Even horrible actors in films are remembered, but okay actors are forgettable.     
  
Personally, I'm not too sure how I feel about this film just yet.  Which is new for me.  I haven't decided whether it's my guilty pleasure or something I shouldn't be impressed with. 
I'm slightly embarrassed to admit, I'd watch this film again.   

I give this film 7.5/10.   See it at your own discretion.

The Tourist

So, I didn't expect much from this film... and that is exactly what I got.  Not much.

Here's a breakdown of the plot.  The Tourist is about a woman named Elise Clifton-Ward (Angelina Jolie) who is involved with a criminal named Alexander Pearce.  She is being followed by the police of Scotland Yard in order to catch Pearce.  This takes place in Italy where Elise chooses an unsuspecting tourist named Frank Tupelo (Johnny Depp) to be a distraction.  Frank becomes a target.  However, Elise underestimates the guilt she feels for setting Frank up and the feelings that evolve for him.  She saves him, helps him, and tries to finish what she started.   

I am a fan of Johnny Depp, but I had a feeling this wouldn't be one if his shining moments.

But let's move on from him for a moment.
Apparently, Angelina Jolie has been in the mood for picking movies with ridiculous twist endings.  First Salt, then this.  I won't give the ending away for anyone, but, if you think your going to be impressed, all I have to say is, don't get your hopes up.  The twist and turns in this movie weren't clever, the dialogue was nothing special, the acting didn't move me, consume me, or even make me believe in the characters.  For two supposed A-list actors, their performances were mediocre to say the least.  They tried to tie up the film at the end, but all it did was leave questions unanswered.  Specific scenes near the beginning seemed pointless, once the truth was revealed.  Nothing properly connected.   

The character's falling in love was the most unbelievable.  It felt like it came out of no where. And Frank's willingness to go along with everything Elise throws at him was unrealistic and frustrating.   

From Angelina's weak fake British accent to Johnny Depp's unconcerned go-with-the-flow character, I was simply content.  I was not necessarily happy, but I didn't feel like my time was completely wasted.   So, if your in the mood to stare at Angelina Jolie, much like everyone else in the film, or simply watch Johnny Depp -for the first time in his life- play a normal/boring sort of character, then you'd enjoy this film.

I give it 6.2/10 for not being a complete waste of my time but getting pretty close.