The Cabin in the Woods

 

This film was a pleasant surprise...

The Cabin in the Woods seems like a typical horror film, however, it actually enjoys turning the genre on its head.  It's about five college students who go to a cabin for spring break, only to meet their inevitable death.  You think you've seen this film a thousand times with different variations, but trust me, you haven't.  Let's just say, premeditated murder has been taken to a whole new level.  This film stars Chris Hemsworth (a.k.a. cutie), Kristen Connolly, Anna Hutchison, Franz Kranz and Jesse Williams.

All the actors did a great job.  I enjoyed the approach the writers and creators took to this film.  They incorporated humour and horror, which was refreshing for me.  The idea that people were watching each death without a shred of remorse was definitely a comment on the media in our world today -  a nice touch.  I would also like to add that I absolutely loved the beginning.  I thought it was a really light way to start a potential horror film.
Now, let's get to the actual problems of the film, because they weren't that small.

The ending was too ridiculous for me.  It went from interesting, intriguing, to flat out - "are you kidding me?"  The killer unicorn was probably my absolute favourite.  Yes, that's right, a killer unicorn.  Who would have thunk it?

The story lost my respect towards the end.  Too much of a stretch that didn't really resolve itself.  I do, however, like how they set up the stereotype of the characters - the stoner, the virgin, the football star, the not so virgin, the book worm - and then they mock that stereotype for you, so you don't have to.  I enjoyed that. 

Therefore, other than the ending, this film is worth the watch.  I give it 7.8/10 for being unique, fun, and extremely entertaining.             

The Hunger Games

As a reader and fan of the novels, I was impressed...

The Hunger Games, based on Suzanne Collins' novel of the same name, takes place in the future, where a part of the world is divided into 12 districts.  Every year, two tributes are chosen from each district to fight to the death in front of millions. This acts as a reminder of the Capitol's power over its people.  This film stars Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Elizabeth Banks, and Jennifer Lawrence.

Jennifer Lawrence did a great job playing her character, leaving subtle traces of shock, strength and fear.  The men in this film also did a great job with their acting.  The stage set was wonderful and detailed as well.  There was some unnecessary tweaking to the story, which irritated me because it wouldn't have been a big deal if they just left it the way it was.  For example, the whole reason Katniss gets the mockingjay pin is changed in the film.  I would think something that obvious would have remained the same, but I guess I was wrong.

As for the film as a whole, I felt for those audience members that knew nothing about the books or their storyline.  The film does not do enough to keep them involved with what is going on and why events are happening, which is preventing specific audience members from enjoying the film as much as everyone else.  This is the fault of the film makers, having the assumption that everyone is in tune with the storyline. 

I also want to comment on the romance element.  I think it did not get its due in this film.  It was completely rushed through and unclear, therefore, unbelievable (and this is coming from someone who read the book and enjoyed it).  I realize the main character is faking her feelings most of the time, but both actors seemed like they weren't sure how to approach those scenes, and the writing/editing/direction, didn't help either. I guess what I'm getting at is that the actors seemed uncomfortable with those scenes, entering a drastic change from the rest of the film.  The film should have transitioned much better into romance. 

My advice -stick closer to the novel and save yourself the risk of messing up too much.

All in all, a great film.  I appreciated all the effort put in to it and I'm looking forward to the second installment.  I really hope it keeps up with its newly formed standard. I give this film 8.3/10.            

The Vow

Wasn't as bad as I thought it was going to be...

The Vow is about a married couple that make it through a bad car accident, however, Rachel McAdam's character (the wife) experiences partial memory loss.  She can't remember her own husband.  As you can imagine, this would be just devastating for the husband, played by Channing Tatum.  Instead of dwelling on the bad, he sees it as an opportunity to make his wife fall in love with him all over again.  Does it work?

Well, the romantic in all of us would certainly hope so, but don't hold your breath.

So, I'm conflicted.  This film does not satisfy the romance genre as I would hope, because the ending is somewhat unconventional.  How do I explain without giving the ending away?  The resolution of the film is based on choice.  Usually, when you watch a romance, it is all about how the woman cannot live without the man or vice versa, therefore, lack of choice.  However, in this film, it's about how the woman takes her time and makes a choice.  This film takes a more individualistic approach to love, rather than all or nothing.  It takes its time with the circumstances.  You might say it is in fact more realistic in regards to love, than most films.  Because of this, I respect it.

Now, here's the problem.  For the same reason I respect the film, I also felt dissatisfied with it.  The ending was a let down, because there was no grand gesture. The ending, the conclusion, was just too simple.  It didn't match up.  It is almost as if the film rejected itself and tried to turn in to something else, just at the very end.  The ending was unfulfilled. You'll see what I mean if you go and see this film.   

Okay, so if I haven't confused you enough, let's move on to the technicalities of the film.  The acting from Channing Tatum wasn't completely horrible, but it wasn't anything to rave about either.  I didn't really care for him.  Every time he talks I want to yell at him, "Open your mouth! Relax your jaw!"  He's always mumbling his lines, and it pisses me off.
Rachel McAdams bothered me only during the cheesy (in love) scenes, because to me she played her character so cheesy that it came off as overacting.  I don't like when I have to be reminded that someone is trying to play a part.  With Rachel, I felt that way the most when she was acting in love.  I felt that way the least when she was confused and lost.  It seems she's better with drama.

As for the flow of the film, it was decent, nothing major to complain about.  Nothing else really stood out to me as bad or good - it all seemed passable otherwise.

I give this film 5.8/10.  I definitely won't remember it in a month's time.  P.S. I Love You is still the reigning champion for me.

This Means War

 

If Chris Pine and Tom Hardy were not present in this film, it would have been completely pointless and a waist of time - but that's just my opinion.  Not that I have anything against Reese Witherspoon... it's just... look at them!  (picture above)

Okay, now that I sidestepped the obvious, we can get back to the film's synopsis.  This Means War is about two CIA agents, who just happen to be partners, that find out they are dating the same girl.  Competition heats up when they decide to win over her affections, without letting her in on the fact that they know she's dating both of them.  This film stars Reese Witherspoon, Chris Pine, Tom Hardy and Chelsea Handler.

We all can understand the obvious appeal.  A great cast, a romantic trio, and a comedian to make you laugh all the way through.  Sounds like a perfect mix?  Well, it's not.

Despite the fact that each of these actors are good at what they do, for some reason, the putting together of the film doesn't allow that talent to shine.  I blame the producers, the writers, and the director.  Honestly, what were they thinking?  It's almost as if they relied so much on the reputations of the actors to sell their movie, that they didn't bother to make it much of a movie.  The plot was not creative or unique to me, despite the fact they were CIA agents and not just normal men.  The humor was forgettable.  I didn't feel the impact of the storyline.  I didn't feel the intensity of the situation.  It felt rushed all the way through, like they were doing one scene, just so that they could get to the next one.  Chris Pine tries to salvage this oversight, but his efforts weren't enough to prevent this train wreck of a film.  And Tom hardy, really?  I expected so much more from you.  To go from Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, to this?

Basically, my problem surrounds the putting together of the film - the editing.  The scene to scene transitions, the plot development, the convenient ending.  It just felt like the least amount of effort was put in from everyone, even at times, the actors.  I know they are capable of better, that's what bothers me the most.

I don't know what else to say.  Major disappointment.  Other than Chris Pine and at times Tom Hardy, this film was weak.  I give this film 5.6/10.  Get your shit together guys!              

Chronicle

 

This film started out strong and then slowly descended into unbelievable territory.

Chronicle follows the life of a neglected and abused teenager named Andrew, who lives as a social outcast at school. He begins recording his life with a video camera, isolating himself even more from the rest of the world.  Things change when he, his cousin Matt, and his cousin's friend Steven, come in contact with unknown matter.  They each develop telekinetic powers that allow them to do things they never could have imagined. This film stars Dane DeHaan, Michael B. Jordan, Michael Kelly, and Alex Russel.

My favourite aspect of this film is that the audience is always viewing it through the perspective of the camera the character is holding.  The film plays with this perspective, hopping it around as characters take the camera from one another.  I thought this was very unique and interesting, however, if your sensitive to movement, it can make you a little nauseous.  It reminded me of The Blair Witch Project.

The acting in this film was really well done and realistic. I really have no negative comments about the acting.

I do, however, have negative comments about the plot.  Near the end of the film - the climax - was when my respect for the plot flew out the window.  Events became too hectic, too fast, too irrational and too extreme.  It reminded me I was only watching a movie, taking me out of that world and putting me firmly back into the theatre seat.  This ruined the whole film for me.

Because this film held strong 3/4 of the way through, I give it 7.6/10 for attempting something different, something original, among the interchangeable films we've been watching so far this year.

Man on a Ledge

 

No, they did not put much thought into the title of this film...  

Man on a Ledge follows the life of an escaped convict, as he tries to prove himself innocent for his supposed crime - being accused of stealing a $40 million dollar diamond.  This film stars Sam Worthington, Elizabeth Banks, Jamie Bell, Genesis Rodriguez and Ed Harris.

Whenever I tell someone I saw the film Man on a Ledge, they always ask me, "So, did he jump off the ledge?"  Well, I'm here to tell you... it's not exactly worth the watch to find out.  It's a good thing this film has more plot dynamic than you might have originally anticipated.  Not bad for a movie with a title like Man on a Ledge. 

Anyways, everything about this film was decent - not amazing, not impressive, but consistently entertaining.  Elizabeth Banks' acting bothered me, however.  She was not convincing as a negotiator, with something to prove to her male superiors.  She came off just as lazy as the people who gave the film its title.  She portrayed the character with little enthusiasm or attitude, and came off unimaginative and dull.  There was no feeling of determination when she spoke her lines, which would have been one of the most important things to convey about her character.  To sum her up: a disappointment.

As for all the other actors, their characters were not exactly deep, but they kept me interested in what was going on... which says something.  They did their jobs, more or less.

I do have to point out Ed Harris, who in my opinion was the star of the film.  He did a great job with his small, but important role.  I finally felt reminded of what real acting is.  It wasn't just make-believe for Ed Harris, but a matter of completely giving himself over to the character.  A complete abandonment of self.  I give him a thumbs up for making some portion of this film have purpose.

Now, this is not a film I would see again.  Once was enough for me, and I don't think it will leave a lasting impression.  So, here is my advice to those of you not sure what to see this weekend.  Man on a Ledge is a light thriller that will be fleeting with its effect on you, if it has any effect on you.  I give this film 6.7/10. It's just okay. It's no Phone Booth.          

The Woman in Black

 

Well, some would say that Daniel Radcliffe will forever be seen as Harry Potter and nothing else.  I think that this might be one of the rare occasions when an actor actually takes his job so seriously that he surpasses the media's low expectations of him.  That goes for all of the young Harry Potter actors.  

The Woman in Black, based on a novel by Susan Hill, is about a young lawyer who is asked by his boss to sort out papers on a property that is meant to be sold.  Little does he know that the property he needs to sort out is haunted by a vengeful mother longing for her dead son, taking her anger out on the children of the town.  

This film is your typical horror film.  You've got ghosts, shadows, black and grey everywhere, things popping out of corners.  This film totally relies on the power of sound at just the right moments, and shadows to keep everything eery.  The set design was really well done and the tone of the film was perfect. To top the horror tradition, you actually have a good actor leading the entire thing. 

Now, to transition from some positive to some negative.  Daniel Radcliffe does not really pull off a father or a widow missing his wife, for that matter.  I didn't feel the parental love I should have felt or the inner pain certain flashbacks were telling us he was in.  He may have taken a leap with that one.  As for the events, moving from one to the other, it seemed slow and slightly repetitive.  It took a while for things to get really interesting with the ghost and Radcliffe.  The ending was not satisfying and you don't quite get any closure.  

With a strong performance from the entire cast, all this film needed was more plot dynamic.  Because it lacked this, I give this film 6.8/10.