Captain America 2: The Winter Soldier Movie Review

Now that's more like it.

We're done with Iron Man 3 and Thor 2: The Dark World, now Phase 2 of the Marvel Cinematic Universe brings us Captain America: The Winter Solder. From Joe and Anthony Russo, the directors of You, Me, and Dupree- no, you didn't read that wrong- comes the follow-up to the 2011 superhero flick Captain America: The First Avenger. Taking place 2 years after the events from The Avengers, we find Steve Rogers working with S.H.I.E.L.D while simultaneously trying to adapt to the new world. But all isn't what it seems as Steve, with the help of Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and the new-edition to the team Sam Wilson AKA Falcon (Anthony Mackie), begins to unravel a conspiracy in SHIELD and tries to uncover the truth behind the deadly assassin known as the Winter Soldier. There have been many superhero movies in the past 9 years or so. We've seen comic book material be adapted to the screen in a multitude of different ways. We've seen it done dark and gritty like in The Dark Knight, we've seen it done light and witty like in Iron Man, and then we saw whatever the hell Green Lantern was doing. If there is anything we've learned from all of this, it's that Hollywood hasn't completely nailed down a sustainable formula for how to make a great comic book movie. Both ways certainly have their flaws; many people don't like the constant comedy in the Marvel movies, and many people don't like the feeling of sadness and depression one gets from watching a DC movie- very hard to pick. Sarcasm aside, I find myself leaning towards Marvel. While I'm all for trying something new and I do think that The Dark Knight is the best comic book movie to date, it's also the only film using that formula that I really cared for. Batman Begins was fine, but The Dark Knight Rises and Man of Steel never sat right with me. Rises was probably one of the messiest and worst written superhero films I've seen, and Man of Steel was DOA by using a tone that didn't mesh well with the source material- in my opinion. So naturally, I went into this movie fully aware that it could be great or it could be a disappointment; especially seeing as how comic book movies seem to be hit-or-miss of late. I'm thrilled to say, it was great. In fact, it very well may be one of the best superhero movies ever made, and that IS saying a lot. There's so much that this film did well, like the action. The action scenes in this film were extremely well-choreographed and even better, they were timed perfectly. They were spread apart well so that each fight scene was included to move the plot forward, not to just have cool stuff on screen. It's just like what George Lucas once said, "Special effects are just a tool, a means of telling a story. People have a tendency to confuse them as an end to themselves. A Special effect without a story is a pretty boring thing." I of all people understand the irony of George Lucas saying this, but regardless, it's still true. The Russo brothers as well as the screenwriters have a grasp on this concept; something Zack Snyder needs. While the action was excellent, what really made this movie shine was the plot. 

The Dark Knight was so ground-breaking because it took it's comic book source material and turned it into a crime thriller. Captain America 2 is just as ground-breaking, for it decided to deviate from the past Marvel movies and effectively make a 70's-ish political spy thriller. At the beginning of this review I made a point of saying that there is a clear difference in tone when it comes to DC and Marvel. DC is dark and realistic, and Marvel is more fantastical and light. This was probably the first film in the MCU that began to cross that line. It brilliantly took the realism and seriousness in plot from DC, while also maintaining the witty humor in dialogue and fun from Marvel. A perfect combination for a near-perfect film. In the end, Captain America: The Winter Soldier is undoubtedly one the best comic book movies today, if not one of the best action movies today. It has a great plot and great characters. The lead villain is terrifying and actually poses as a good threat to not just Cap but everyone. There's great action while also delivering a thought-provoking and surprisingly heartfelt story. It may not reach the levels of epicness proudly owned by The Dark Knight and The Avengers, but it comes pretty darn close; and it gives me hope that we are on track to reach that level once again. Final Rating: A-

Robocop (2014)

Well, look on the bright side. It could have been a lot worse...

I would like to start this review by saying I love Robocop. By that, of course, I'm referring to Paul Verhoeven's 1987 classic starring Peter Weller. It was a lot of fun, and there were enough blood-squibs to keep me satisfied. It was campy, bloody, goofy, and, like I said, a whole lot of fun. These great things cannot be said about the remake, unfortunately. After hollow action remakes like Total Recall, Planet of the Apes, and The Italian Job, expectations were low for this flick. In fact, I'm pretty sure most wrote it off from the get-go. People expected it to be terrible, which, as it turns out, wasn't the result. Robocop, directed by Jose Padilha, is the near definition of an "okay" movie. I understand why they can't make this funny and satirical. Back in the late 80's, DVD players weren't even invented yet. The whole concept of drones was futuristic, so having it be a satire works. It's 2014, the concept of putting a man inside a machine doesn't seem so ludicrous now, in fact, it is a possibility if not a probability. You can't make the story a satire anymore, you have to play it more straight; which is the direction the filmmakers took, and maybe a little too far. You don't have to make it extremely funny or goofy, but that doesn't mean it has to be humorless. The fact is, as a huge Robocop fan, I find the premise to be funny. Here this guy is walking around like a Robot, squeaking every time he turns his robotic head- it puts a smile on my face. Here the writers and director are trying to shove pathos in my face, with this new family storyline that I'm suppose to just start caring about for some reason. You can't have an emotional scene between a young boy and his robotic father and have your audience take it seriously. 

That being said, if one tries to ignore the conflicting feelings throughout the film, some enjoyment can be found. The action scenes are generally well-choreographed. Specifically the training scenes, which a lot of people didn't like for some reason. It was a cool new take on the concept of a robotic police officer to show the training, and I didn't mind the somewhat cheesy rock music playing throughout. It felt like a nice little callback to 80's action flicks. A flattering callback, unlike the shoe-horned in score from the original. Which leads me to another complaint- all the callbacks. I really hoped to walk into this movie and leave not constantly comparing it to the original, which is sort of the case. I only compared it a few times, particularly the few times it reminded me that I am watching a remake. "I'll buy that for a dollar" and scenes like that didn't sit right with me. I wanted the similarities between the remake and the original to begin and end with 'policeman is a robot'. I don't like talking in theaters, I don't even like laughing or whispering during a movie but that "dollar" scene made me yell "come on!" to the screen. I didn't want to, but Hollywood made me. In the end, the thing I recommend most is to never compare this to the original. Seriously, just don't- it will crumble in comparison. It's not the goofy Robocop we've all come to love, but it's not terrible like Robocop 3. The film is played very straight, which does diminish some enjoyment. But the action is great, it tried to do something new with the premise which is admirable. If you go into this movie thinking it will suck, then you are in for a pleasant surprise. If you go in thinking it'll reign superior to the great work of Verhoveen, then you will leave disappointed. Final Rating: B-

Short Term 12 Movie Review

Moving, authentic, and touching. Brie Larson leads an incredibly talented ensemble in this revealing and truthful motion picture.

Set in a foster-care facility, Short Term 12 analyzes the lives of today's struggling youth and the group of dedicated individuals determined to support them. The film follows 20-somethings Grace and Mason, both staff members at a foster-care facility for at-risk teens and long-time couple, as they try to balance their personal lives and the lives of the kids in their care. The film stars Brie Larson (21 Jump Street, United States of Tara) and John Gallagher Jr. (The Newsroom) as the two dedicated counselors at the facility. The supporting cast is mostly made up of novice actors, which is definitely not shown thorough their performances. 

Every once in a while, a movie comes out that moves you. In a cinematic generation mostly made up of cheap, hollow remakes and CGI-filled superhero flicks, these types of movies are a rarity. We don't necessarily see many films nowadays that are just about people dealing with the difficulties of life, not unless those difficulties include explosions or kidnappings. Out of those types of movies we do see, this one is far superior. Brie Larson delivered one of the best performances of the year, and the best of her career. The fact that she got snubbed for an Oscar just further demonstrates the absurdity and diminishing relevance of The Oscars. She deserved to be recognized, as did the movie itself. I've never heard of director Destin Cretton before, but he is now definitely on my radar. I have never been a huge fan of shaky-cam, but Cretton utilizes it extremely well and creates an incredible depth and realism that is absent in most of contemporary cinema. 

Not only her performance astounded me, but the whole cast was exceptional. From John Gallagher Jr., to all the kids in the facility, everyone did a phenomenal job. The direction was great, the acting was astounding and hauntingly realistic. All of these aspects of film are extremely important, but even with the best acting and directing in the world, a film still has the potential of failing if the writing is bad. Luckily, Short Term 12 is not poorly written. In fact, it may have one of the most developed and engaging screenplays of the year. All of the characters are amazingly realistic, and Destin Cretton did a great job at portraying these tragic characters in an honest, not ham-fisted way. Overall, every aspect of this film was excellent; the actors, the writing, the directing, the camera movement, even the film's final shot was brilliant. In an era of films in which style is valued over substance, it's refreshing to witness a movie this honest and real. Hollywood, take note- this is how I movie should be made. Final Rating: A

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug Movie Review

Peter Jackson reclaims my faith in him in this fun, well-paced film far superior to the original. 

Peter Jackson is back! You have no idea how great it is to say that. After failures like The Lovely Bones and The Hobbit: An Unexpected Disappoint-sorry, "Journey", one of my favorite directors is back at the top of his game. Jackson takes us back to Middle Earth in this exciting adventure. Martin Freeman reprises his role as the Hobbit Bilbo Baggins and Sir Ian McKellen returns as Gandalf the Grey, both characters continue their quest to reclaim Erebor. I won't sugar-coat it, the first Hobbit movie was not what I expected. Seeing as how the Lord of the Rings trilogy remains to be some of my favorite movies ever, I had high hopes for my return to Middle Earth. I hadn't read the Hobbit book, and I was, and still am, a bit concerned about the fact that they extended it into a trilogy. Lord of the Rings is a 3-book series at 400 pages a piece, and the Hobbit is one book with 300 pages. You don't make that book into a trilogy. Because of this, the first movie is incredible boring. It took a very long time for the plot to kick in, the effects were embarrassingly bad on occasion, and it made me worry Peter Jackson has lost his touch. The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug is what I really wanted An Unexpected Journey to be. It was really well written, well paced, and I've come to the conclusion that Martin Freeman is the perfect actor to play Bilbo. However, the effect were still a bit disappointing. There is one scene in particular involving the Necromancer and Gandalf that would make one shake one's head in disbelief. However, such a disappointment in effects can be easily forgiven by the inclusion of the dragon towards the end, Smaug. Voiced by the talented Benedict Cumberbatch, the dragon Smaug is what really makes this movie great. The effects were outstanding and the dragon himself was well-written. He was frightening, menacing, smart, and extremely intimidating. Overall, The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug improves upon all the things that were disappointing about the first Hobbit film. The writing and pacing was better, the acting was good, and the dragon was perfectly done. There were a few scenes that included some truly terrible special effects, but the scenes of great fun and action make up for it and

then some. Final Rating: B+

American Hustle Movie Review

Complex, Silly, and very, very 70's. 

From director David O'Russell, the mind behind Silver Linings Playbook and The Fighter, comes perhaps his greatest achievement yet. American Hustle brings together the main cast of O'Russell's last two films, including Christian Bale and Amy Adams (The Fighter), and Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence (Silver Linings Playbook). The film revolves around con man Irving Rosenfeld (Bale) and his partner in crime Sydney Porter (Adams) as they are forced into working with deranged FBI agent Richie DiMaso (Cooper). DiMaso's main intention in assembling this con team is to take down corrupt politicians and powerbrokers, starting with passionate and honorable New Jersey Mayor Carmine Polito. The casting for this movie is brilliant, all of these excellent actors are at the top of their game. Bale has once again disappeared into his character and delivered a completely convincing performance. Amy Adams once again convinces me of her incredible talent, and Bradley Cooper really sells it as the unhinged FBI agent. Not only were the extremely talented leads brilliant, but even the supporting cast. For instance, Academy Award Winner Jennifer Lawrence as Rosenfeld's insane wife, Rosalyn. She and director David O'Russell have proven to be a very talented movie duo, and Lawrence gives a performance almost as awe-inspiring as her Oscar-Winning performance in Silver Linings Playbook. While Lawrence's performance was definitely a scene-stealing one, I feel like it was the cameo performance of legend Robert De Niro that was really show-stopping. De Niro hasn't had the best cinematic luck lately, so I'm glad to see him work with O'Russell after working on Silver Linings Playbook. Hustle definitely had a Scorsese-esque/Goodfellas feeling to it, and his appearance only elevates that. While the acting was top-notch from every single cast member, I think the direction and writing are what really make this film. I read that O'Russell let the actors have a lot of room to improvise, and you can really feel it through the realistic, but unbalanced, tone the film expresses. 

That writing/directing decision is what made the movie what it is. Now, that's not necessarily a good thing. While the improvisation did make the feature feel more realistic, it also made it, like I just stated, very unbalanced. The plot slows down, speeds up, and then slows down again seemingly at random. Plot and structure are very important to a movie, while I do appreciate a good character-driven film, consistency is very important. It's hard for a movie which has such inconsistent characters to be character-driven. The story behind this movie is a fascinating one, and perhaps deserved to be told in a more procedural, structured fashion. But to David O'Russell, plot doesn't matter, characters are what matter. Once one understands that is the film's real intention, the final product can be appreciated more. Overall, American Hustle's tone is a bit unstable and deranged, but so are the characters O'Russell has created. All the actors do a great job in their roles, and keep you entertained for most of the two hour run time.. Final Rating: B

12 Years a Slave Movie Review

Slavery's Schindler's List, and deserving of all the appreciation and praise. 

From Steve McQueen, director of one-word, underrated masterpieces such as Hunger and Shame, comes this slavery epic starring Chiwetel Ejiofor and Michael Fassbender. The film follows Solomon Northup, a free man living with his family in New York, after he is tricked, kidnapped, and then sold into slavery. For 12 years he was degraded and tortured- both physically and mentally. His terrifying journey begins with working for Master Ford (Benedict Cumberbatch), a kind slave owner; as kind as a slave holder can be. Solomon's journey then leads to him to owner Edwin Epps (Michael Fassbender), a crazed, overly-relegious, cruel owner. Solomon must muster up all the strength he has and never give up hope, for if he surrenders and accepts the position he is in, even if he survives he will never live. Back in 1993, Steven Spielberg directed the cinematic masterpiece Schindler's List. The incredible film took an unflinching look at the Holocaust and the sheer brutality of the Nazis. The film took home 7 Academy Awards, including Best Director and Best Film of the Year. Since then, many movies have taken a realistic, terrifying look at the Holocaust; for instance, The Boy with the Stripped Pajamas and Inglourious Bastards. However, no Holocaust film has lived up to the unwavering storytelling of Schindler's List. 12 Years a Slave is not about the Holocaust, but it's aggressive look at slavery is just as awe-inspiring. I have been somewhat of a fan of director Steven McQueen for a while now, even since I experienced Hunger. His directing is unlike anything I've ever seen, the stillness and steadiness of some of his movies is hauntingly beautiful. 

The best thing about McQueen is that he can really get amazing, realistic performances from his actors. From the extremely underrated Chiwetel Ejiofor, to a cameo performance from Brad Pitt, the ensemble in this film was phenomenal. Everyone had an important part to play and everyone did an outstanding job, particularly Ejiofor. Before watching this movie, I had quite the conundrum when it came to who should win best actor. Tom Hanks did an amazing job as Captain Phillips in Captain Phillips, it looked like Matthew Mcaughnahy is continuing his incredible career improvement in Dallas Buyer's Club, and I'm one of those people who thinks it's absolutely ridiculous that Leonardo DiCaprio hasn't won an Academy Award yet, so I was hoping for the best with The Wolf of Wallstreet. I had no idea who should win, now I do. Chiwetel's performance as Solomon Northup was undoubtedly the best this whole year. He is incredibly powerful and sympathetic, and he makes you hope and pray the character will survive this horrific ordeal. The amount of fear and turmoil he can convey with just a single look is mesmerizing. And I highly doubt he is the only actor who will bring home the golden statue for this movie. Michael Fassbender, playing the ruthless Edwin Epps, also delivers one of the best performances this year.

He has some competition with Jared Leto in Dallas Buyer's Club, but his chances are still pretty good. He's a villan who lacks any sort of redemption, much like Ralph Fienne's performance in Schindler's List. His purpose in the movie is for the audience to hate and despise him, and it's safe to say they achieved their objective. Then there is novice actress Lupita Nyong'o, playing Patesy, a slave on the Epps plantation that Edwin has an attraction towards. Her performance, even though she only shows up half way through the movie, is one of the most memorable. Every single actor did an astonishing job, and they all deserve to be recognized for it. Then we get to the writing, one of the most crucial parts of any motion picture. At first, when I heard that the screenwriter was going to be the same writer of Red Tails and Undercover Brother, I was terrified. Both films were terribly written and it would be unfortunate for a movie with this amount of potential to fall apart due to an inconsistent script. Luckily, the writing was superb as well. The characters were well fleshed out and the pacing was hauntingly realistic. Solomon Northup's true story is an incredible one full of courage and strength, it's nice to see the film adaptation does it justice. Overall, 12 Years A Slave is the quintessential slavery epic. Thanks to Steve McQueen's harrowing, realistic direction, the lead actor's powerful and heart wrenching performance, 12 Years A Slave is, without a doubt, the most incredible film of 2013, and one of the best ever made. It's fair to say it more than deserves such a prestigous title. Final Rating: A

Thor: The Dark World Movie Review

Nothing new, which isn't such a bad thing.

Thor returns to the big screen after the events that occurred in The Avengers. It starts with Loki back home, preparing to face Asgardian justice for the crimes he committed in New York. Now, Thor is faced with an enemy that even Odin and Asgard cannot withstand, so he now must embark on his most dangerous and personal journey yet, one that will reunite him with Jane Foster and force him to sacrifice everything to save us all. Thor: The Dark World is the second feature film of Phase Two in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, following Iron Man 3. The entire original main cast of the original reprise their roles, including Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, and Anthony Hopkins. There are also some new cast members, like former-Doctor Who actor Christopher Eccleston. The cast aren't the only new additions to the movie. With director Kenneth Branagh (5-time Oscar Nominee famous for great Shakespearean adaptations such as Hamlet and Henry V) no longer in the the director's chair, it's Alan Taylor (famous for his work on popular shows such as Game of Thrones and The Sopranos) who gets behind the camera. At first, this direction change was nerve-racking. Branagh is a tremendous director, and Taylor is primarily a TV-director for hire. Luckily, Taylor didn't screw this up. It may have been the disappointment I had with Iron Man 3, but I really didn't have high expectations for this film. I came to terms with the fact that no Superhero movie, be that DC or Marvel, is going to live up to the Avengers. 

Even though this fact still stands, Thor 2 was a lot better than expected. The action scenes were a lot better than the ones in the original. Even though Alan Taylor is primarily a director for the small screen, nothing about the scale of the action felt small. The biggest down-side to this movie was the comedy. The Avengers was a very funny movie, but it was only funny when the levity was necessary. Thor 2 almost felt like a comedy, but with a lot of great, well-crafted action sequences. If they just would have toned down the humor a bit, the movie could have been a lot better. That, and if they could have improved the plot. The fact is, when we have a cinematic universe that includes something as epic as The Avengers, everything else feels extremely filler. The same happened with the two Iron Man sequels, when you have a movie about an individual Avenger that isn't an origin story, it feels like the only point is to kill time until the next team-up epic. It seems like every action movie nowadays is about the earth being potentially destroyed by some malicious villain and the good guy needs to stop him- which he always does after a CGI-filled 10 minute battle. It's nothing new or groundbreaking when it comes to the concept, it's the execution that really matters. And I'm happy to say that, overall, it is well-executed. The action is still good, the acting and writing were fine, the tone towards the end is a little darker which is appreciated. Overall, it's nothing unprecedented in contemporary cinema, but Thor: The Dark World is filled with enough high-flying action to entertain the masses. Final Rating: B