Category Archives: Rants

If a movie is awful, it is usually fun to review and tear apart. Such as these…

‘The Gunman’ Low On Guns, High on Snoozes

The_Gunman_Official_Theatrical_PosterA message to Sean Penn: Liam Neeson you are not.

“The Gunman” stars Sean Penn as an ex-gun-for-hire who carried out a foreign assassination and finds his past catching up to him eight years later. Idris Elba, Ray Winstone and Javier Bardem also star as Pierre Morel (director of the first “Taken” film) directs.

On paper, this movie should have worked. Sure, the “retired gunman comes out for one last job” is a rehashed genre (heck, I just reviewed “Run All Night” the other day), but “Gunman” has an A-list cast, a director who showed he can direct a 50-year-old in an action film, and a fun-looking trailer. What’s the end result? A bunch of A-list cameos, shoddily executed action scenes, and a trailer that clearly knew it had to lie about the true content of its product.

For a movie entitled “The Gunman” there sure is a scarcity of guns in this film. Like seriously, I think there are three shootouts in this, and most of them consist of Sean Penn ducking in-and-out of cover, spraying his gun at what he hopes are enemies.

The film takes a few minutes to get up and running, giving us what I assume they intended to be character development (it’s just boring forced narrative). When the first shot is finally taken, you think you’re in for a solid action film. LOL, nope. The rest of the first act is an awkward and unbelievable soap opera drama between Penn, Bardem and Penn’s ex-girlfriend, who is now Bardem’s wife and Bardem is threatened by Penn, but he’s not, and…I don’t know what to tell you, the film is a mess.

Let’s get to the characters. No one in this film acts like a real person. Bardem is a clowny cartoon, who says things that made me cringe and scratch my head. In his limited screen time he is just a laughing, bumbling goofball, paranoid that Penn is simply there to steal his wife. Idris Elba shows up for five minutes simply to put his name on the poster, and Ray Winstone does his grumbling Ray Winstone thing. Any big name actor on the poster not named Sean Penn is in this movie for no more than 15 minutes, I kid you not.

I really don’t know if there’s anything good I can say about “The Gunman”. The more I write about it, the more I’m growing to dislike it, and I walked out disliking it a pretty fair amount as was. Even the set pieces of the Congo, London and Rome are so bland they don’t add any visual candy to the experience.

Sean Penn clearly wanted to make this movie (he also produced and co-wrote it), but this passion project was a struggle to sit through. The film is so agonizingly paced, clichédly written and boring in its narrative that when the gun battles we were promised in the trailer finally arrive, we just don’t care.

“The Gunman” has all the looks and feel of a mid-day soap opera, but all the razor-sharp excitement of a mid-day soap opera. The only reason this mundane “action” film won’t derail Sean Penn’s career is because the only people who will hopefully ever be forced to sit through it are in an interrogation room in Guantanamo Bay.

Critics Rating: 3/10

the-gunman-sean-penn

Variety

There Are 100 Things Wrong with ’50 Shades of Grey’

Leave a reply

Fifty-Gray-posterWell…let’s get this thing over with, shall we?

“Fifty Shades of Grey” is based off the best-selling novel of the same name by E. L. James (maybe you’ve heard of it?). The film stars Dakota Johnson as Anastasia Steele, a recent college grad who falls for a young billionaire named Christian Grey, played by Jamie Dornan, who has very specific tastes, to keep things PG. Sam Taylor-Johnson directs.

I really had no idea what to expect as I walked into this film. I knew that the novel was controversial (I also heard it was one of the worst books ever written), but that’s about it. Even the trailers of the film didn’t do much to suggest a plot summary. Walking out I now know why the trailers didn’t show much: it’s because this movie isn’t about anything and is just downright awful.

I could probably write a thesis paper on what is wrong with this movie, but let’s start with the two leads, Johnson and Dornan. By themselves they’re both serviceable, but together they have almost an awkward amount of lacking chemistry, and are given some of the worst dialogue in the history of cinema to recite.

Seriously, within the first 10 minutes of the film I was cringing at some of the writing, and my friend even leaned over to me and said that the dialogue was awful. I can’t even repeat most of the lines because they’re hilariously intentionally vulgar, but I’ll give you an example of a scene that had me shaking my head.

After having met Christian Grey on two occasions combining for probably about 25 minutes of together time, Anastasia Steele drunk-calls him while out celebrating having just finished college. He gets all upset and mad at her, a 25-year-old woman, for being at a bar, and then somehow (never explained how) he finds her and brings her home. And then the next morning she’s all impressed and they begin their relationship. Like, no. I know Grey is supposed to be a control freak, but no one is that uptight about people they just met.

The pacing in this movie is also an atrocity; I saw people checking their phones every 10 minutes. Every scene consists of essentially the same arc. Christian and Anastasia do their “Fifty Shades of Grey” thing, Anastasia wants Christian to open up to her, he yells and says he can’t, she cries, rinse, repeat. It’s so mundane and repetitive that it makes this two hour runtime feel like an eternity.

It’s also worth noting that there are three scene transitions that burned my eyes. It goes from inside a dark room at night to a bright Seattle skyline instantly, and everyone in the audience exclaimed at once.

Let’s get to the positives. …I mean… director Sam Taylor-Johnson used to be an artist, so the film looks nice. Some of the scenery and tonal colors work well together…that’s actually all I can think of.

I was bored out of my skull watching “Fifty Shades of Grey”, and it isn’t even like the graphic and racy parts live up to the hype (I’ve seen way worse in movies). The whole movie is about Christian Grey tying up and torturing Anastasia, yet I felt like the only one trapped and abused. This isn’t a “so-bad-it’s-good” movie. This is a “so-awful-I-actually-feel-dumber” movie. The actors have no chemistry, the writing is cringe-worthy and the plot is pointless.

There’s a part in the film when Christian is talking about a disclosure contract he makes Anastasia sign, and he says, “forget the contract, it’s getting redundant”. I just rolled my eyes and thought, “this movie is getting redundant…”

Critics Rating: 2/10

fifty-shades-of-grey-berlin-film-festival

Variety

Third Time is Far From the Charm with ‘Taken 3’

Taken_3_poster            I really have to stop giving movies the benefit of the doubt.

Liam Neeson returns as Bryan Mills, the man with a particular set of skills, in “Taken 3”. This time around no one is taken but instead Bryan is framed for the murder of his ex-wife and must run from the LAPD and clear his name. The film is directed by Olivier Megaton, who directed “Taken 2” but not “Taken 1”, so do with that info what you will.

“Taken 3” is the third movie in a series, is following a subpar sequel, and is being released in January. There is literally no reason why I should have thought this would be a good film but alas, I went in optimistic.

That was my mistake and I take full responsibility

There’s a lot going on in “Taken 3” and almost none of it is done coherently. Much like “Taken 2”, Megaton cannot shoot a clean PG-13 action scene, and everything is done using shaky-cam, close-ups and quick, nausea-inducing edits. There is one segment when Neeson is running from the police and you can’t tell what is going on. I actually had to look away from the screen because it was hurting my eyes.

The saving grace is that there isn’t much action in this action film. I actually timed it: it takes 40 minutes for Neeson to punch someone, exactly an hour for him to kill someone and an hour-twenty before he fires a gun. In a movie that is marketed as Liam Neeson killing bad guys, and the third film of a franchise that has seen him kill a combined 50 men, taking over half the film for someone to finally die is unacceptable.

One of the things “Taken 3” almost does well is Forest Whitaker’s new character. Playing the inspector assigned to solving the murder, Whitaker is pretty much Neeson’s mental equal. Every time Neeson tries to pull something, like lose a cell phone or distract the police with a fake car, Whitaker knows it’s a trap and doesn’t fall for it. For a while it is was interesting, however by the end of the film is becomes more tedious because it means that no one is actually gaining any ground on one another.

Try now, if you will, to remember “A Good Day to Die Hard” and how indestructible John McClane has become. That is Liam Neeson in the Taken franchise. He survives things that no human being could ever live through, such as a car flipping a dozen times down a hill and said car then exploding. What’s worse is in the very next scene he is shown completely unharmed, and the film either doesn’t explain how he survived and just expects you to accept it or worse offers a ludicrous, implausible explanation.

This is the best way I can sum it up: the Taken trilogy is just like the Hangover films. The first film was a fun surprise, the second was a subpar but passable carbon copy, and the third tries to divert from the original formula but it ends in horrifically boring results.

“Taken 3” is an uneventful film that is hampered by ineffective PG-13 action sequences, and even seemingly dedicated performances by Neeson and Whitaker can’t elevate an awful script. There isn’t much more to say about this film. The word “taken” is in the title, yet the only thing taken is the audience’s $10. The poster for the film says “It Ends Here”; I sure as heck hope so.

Critics Rating: 3/10

Variety

Variety

Most Anticipated Films of 2015

Leave a reply

Pretty cut-and-dry based on the title, but here are the films that I am most looking forward to in the upcoming year!

10.) Entourage

Following a weak final season of the show, it will be nice to see Ari Gold, Johnny Drama and the rest of the crew back together in Hollywood. Plus it features Tom Brady, Liam Neeson and dozens of other celebrities playing themselves. That’s always fun, right?

Variety

Variety

9.) Get Hard

Kevin Hart teaches Will Ferrell how to survive in prison. If that last sentence didn’t get you excited for Ferrell’s latest film then I don’t know what will.

USA Today

USA Today

8.) Ted 2

I personally enjoyed “A Million Ways to Die in the West”, but some saw it was a disappointing follow-up to Seth MacFarlane’s “Ted”. So that lovable swearing CGI bear is back in 2015, and even though Mila Kunis isn’t there I’m sure I’ll still find enough to enjoy with this one.

Variety

Variety

7.) The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 2

This year’s “Mockingjay Part 1” was arguably the best of the series and set up a fantastic confrontation between Katniss’ rebels and President Snow’s government. I wasn’t sold on the first two Hunger Games being able to deliver an enthralling conclusion, but now I really want to see how Katniss’ story ends. Plus, you know, Jennifer Lawrence…

the-hunger-games-mockingjay-part-1-4

Variety

6.) Spectre

The latest 007 film features Daniel Craig returning as Bond and Christoph Waltz as the film’s villain. Much like “Get Hard” if that sentence did not get you excited for this film, then you best check your pulse.

spectre-007-daniel-craig

Linkiesta

5.) Furious 7

The seventh entry (duh) into the car-turned-heist franchise, this one is extra enticing because it features horror film director James Wan behind the camera and also is the final film for the late Paul Walker, so seeing how the filmmakers handle that will be interesting. Plus Jason Statham is a vengeful bad guy, so that’s should be a good time.

paul-walker-fast-and-furious-63

Variety

4.) Avengers: Age of Ultron

Aside from “Thor 2”, Marvel can do no wrong. Even if most of my excitement is aimed at 2016’s “Captain America: Civil War”, this Avengers sequel should be fun and looks like it will feature a much darker tone.

Avengers-Age-of-Ultron-Trailer-1-Ultron-Intro-Helmet-Crush-620x370

ScreenRant

3.) The Hateful Eight

The movie that almost never was, Quentin Tarantino was all set to not make this film after the script leaked online. But following some begging from fans and Samuel L. Jackson alike, he caved and thank God for it. Another spaghetti Western, this should be a fine possible send-off for Tarantino, and a solid spiritual follow-up to “Django Unchained”.

hateful8

MoviePilot

2.) Ant-Man

All the drama with Edgar Wright’s exit from the project aside, this looks like it could be a lot of fun. It features “Yes-Man” director Peyton Reed replacing Wright, Will Ferrell partner Adam McKay rewriting the script and the impossible-to-hate Paul Rudd playing a superhero. Plus it is part of the aforementioned Marvel Universe. This one could be the next “Guardians of the Galaxy”.

Variety

Variety

1) Star Wars: The Force Awakens

This is in first place on 2015’s most anticipated films by a mile, and for a few reasons. First, it’s Star Wars. The cultural significance of this film is huge, and in 20 years it will be something you will be telling your kids that you saw. Second, it is following the prequel trilogy so it truly can’t be worse, right? And finally the cast is impressive and exciting. Geek God J.J. Abrams writes and directs as motion-capture master Andy Serkis, the charming Adam Driver, Oscar winner Lupita Nyong’o all join the cast while Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher and Mark Hamill all reprise their iconic roles. I got jacked just writing this.

Variety

Variety

What movies are you looking forward to in 2015? Comment below!

Worst Films of 2014

What goes up must come down. There were some great films in 2014, so it only makes sense that there were some stinkers.

Unlike my Top Films list, I saw most every bad movie in 2014. There were some that were bad and just didn’t make the cut, such as “Transcendence” and “Annie”, and please do not take those films not being on this list as my approval for you to see them. But without further ado…

Dishonorable Mention: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

I really didn’t get the hype around this one. I liked the first film but found the sequel boring and pretty uneventful, and by the time we reached the monkeys firing machine guns while riding horses, I had long checked out.

Variety

Variety

10.) Think Like A Man Too

The first film was charming, witty and funny. This film was the opposite of all those things, even with Kevin Hart at his Kevin Hart-iest. I wish this Vegas-set sequel had stayed in Vegas…

Variety

Variety

9.) The Other Woman

I chuckled a few times at this but overall it is a chick flick that is actually insulting to women and their intelligence, so I’m not exactly sure the demographic they were going for here…

Variety

Variety

8.) Ride Along

Hello, Mr. Hart. We meet again. This wasn’t a *bad* movie, it just was a comedy that wasn’t funny. Like, at all. The storyline was basic and cliché, so it wasn’t even like that could hold my attention. Congrats (?) to Hart and director Tim Story for making this list twice.

ridealong

7.) Exodus: Gods and Kings

A movie involving ancient Egypt, gods, plagues and all that fun schtuff shouldn’t be boring. Throw in Batman himself Christian Bale and it really, REALLY shouldn’t be boring. Yet, alas, “Exodus” is boring. Like, check-my-phone-every-ten-minutes boring. Leave it to Hollywood to create yet another movie that is nowhere near as good as the book on which the film is based.

exodus-gods-and-kings-df-01354_rgb

Variety

6.) Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles

There’s really not much to say about this one. Michael Bay produced it. Megan Fox starred in it. I mean, if those aren’t red flags then I don’t know what are…

Variety

Variety

5.) Transformers: Age of Extinction

Dammit, Michael Bay, when will you stop ruining our childhoods?! You want a plot summary of this movie? Here it is: boom. Boom. Boom BOOM. [objectification of women] Boom. BOOM….boom. Like, this is worse than “Revenge of the Fallen” and once I hit the period ending this sentence I will never have to think about Transformers 4 ever again.

Variety

Variety

4.) Blended

[sighhhhhhhh] I hate Adam Sandler.

blended-trailer-adam-sandler

Variety

3.) Annabelle

A scary movie that isn’t scary. Actors that make adult film stars look like Oscar contenders. This thing was a mess. When the doll is the best actor in your film, you know you have a problem.

Variety

Variety

2.) Tammy

I think I laughed…once (?) during this movie. But it wasn’t just me; my theater was dead quiet the whole film. If I wasn’t sick of Melissa McCarthy before, I sure am after seeing this movie. It is just not funny and what’s worse is it’s awkward. And what’s worse yet is when the jokes awkwardly don’t work, the film tries to throw in some drama which doesn’t work, so then THAT adds onto the awkwardness. [exhale] Point is this movie isn’t good.

Variety

Variety

And “Tammy” would have been the worst film of 2014 had it not been for…

1.) Lucy

It really wasn’t a good year for films with women’s names as their title (see the previous three movies, as well as “Annie”). When I walked out of the theater after seeing “Lucy” on that muggy July afternoon, I knew I had just witnessed the worst 2014 had to offer. “Lucy” is stupid, stupid, stupid. As Scarlett Johansson gets smarter, this movie only gets more unintelligent. The ending is also an insult to the audience, as if the director had no idea how to conclude the picture so he threw his hands up and said, “Screw it! The audience is probably asleep by now anyways!” Some people actually liked this movie and it makes me honestly hope Charles Darwin was right about natural selection.

Variety

Variety

Do you agree with my list? Any movies you thought were worse than these? See a film on here that you actually thought was good? Let me know in the comments!

Best Films of 2014

Another year of films, another subjective list ranking them. There were plenty of fun times at the movies in 2014, including some surprises like “Guardians of the Galaxy” and “Draft Day”, and some colorful joy like “The Lego Movie” and “Chef”, all of which were good but did not crack my top ten.

Without further ado…

Honorable Mention: Interstellar

A fun, engaging and well-acted film that could have been great and ranked among the all-time great science-fiction films if it didn’t try and blow the audience’s minds in the final act. Sure, it has the classic Nolan-isms that plague all his films, but this one ranks right below “Inception” on my list of his films.

interstellar-6

Variety

10.) John Wick

Who thought a modern-day film with Keanu Reeves would ever make anyone’s top films list? Well he does it here in one of the best action movies I have ever seen. The cinematography, the action and the music all are amazing, and I really hope that this is the first child of a franchise.

john-wick-keanu-reeves

Variety

9.) Whiplash

The film that likely was the vehicle for future Best Supporting Actor J.K. Simmons, this thing is intense and incredibly well-edited (and that may be selling it short). Simmons and the impossible-to-hate Miles Teller have explosive chemistry and teacher and student, and this is a film I’m sure I’ll only like more upon a second viewing.

Variety

Variety

8.) Foxcatcher

This was number one on my watchlist for 2014 and it didn’t disappoint. Steve Carell is mind-blowingly eerie as John du Pont and Channing Tatum completely shattered my image of him by giving one of the most physically and mentally demanding roles of the year. This film is based on a true story, which makes the whole thing even more intense and emotional.

Variety

Variety

7.) 22 Jump Street

Before he was proving me wrong in “Foxcatcher”, Channing Tatum was doing what we all know and love: being a goofy idiot who kicks butt while undercover at school. A rare sequel that is possibly better than the original, this second trip back to Jump Street was hilarious because it knew it was an over-the-top sequel, and made sure to remind the audience every chance it got.

Variety

Variety

6.) Boyhood

Talk about a full blown nostalgia bomb. Shot with the same actors over 12 years, there was so much that could have gone wrong in the decade-plus while filming this. This movie just has so many things that were a crucial part of my own growing up: from the Oregon Trail computer game to waiting in line for a Harry Potter book to all the early 2000’s songs, this put a lump in my throat and is your cup of tea if you love trying really hard not to cry.

Variety

Variety

5.) X-Men: Days of Future Past

I’m not a huge X-Men fan, so this one caught me by surprise. It was a great action film as well as political thriller that had me entertained throughout the whole runtime. Plus it had Jennifer Lawrence, so. You know.

xmen-days-of-future-past

Variety

4.) The Imitation Game

Featuring an amazing performance from Benedict Cumberbatch and one of my favorite screenplays from 2014 by Graham Moore, this was a very interesting biopic about the men (and woman) who created the world’s first computer in order to beat the Nazis.

Variety

Variety

3.) Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)

Much like “Boyhood” this film was unique on a technical level, and it could have just turned out to be a gimmick that came up flat. Each scene is one take, and the whole film is edited to look like it is all one continuous shot. It really is amazing and offered mind-blowing performances from Edward Norton and Michael Keaton.

Variety

Variety

2.) Fury

Hands down one of the best war movies I’ve ever seen, right behind “Hurt Locker” (oh, shut up, haters). Brad Pitt kills Nazis with a Macklemore haircut, and the end battle sequence is as fun as it is heart-breaking. Honestly, though, ever single aspect of that finale is perfect.

Variety

Variety

1.) Captain America: The Winter Solider

When I saw this movie back in April, I was blown away by not only how much fun this film was, but how smart and well-directed it was, too. The first Captain America was, for lack of better words, not that good, so expectations were not so high for this one. But it turned out to be the second best Avengers movie behind only the first Iron Man, and I am glad it stuck at number one for over 8 months. I kept waiting for a movie to come along that was more fun, more well-made and just plain better than “Captain America: The Winter Solider”, but to my great surprise: none did.

Variety

Variety

Agree with my list? Are there any 2014 films you think deserved to be on here or some that you shocked made the cut? Let me know in the comments!

‘Exodus’: The Book Was Better

Exodus2014Poster            Oh, Hollywood. Yet another example of one of your movies being not as good as the book on which it is based.

“Exodus: Gods and Kings” is the retelling of the age-old story about how Moses led the Hebrews out of Egypt. Christian Bale stars as Moses, Joel Edgerton plays the Pharaoh Ramesses, and Aaron Paul, Ben Kingsley and John Turturro all co-star. Ridley Scott directs.

Earlier this year we got another Bible epic, “Noah”, which was met to mixed responses but I personally enjoyed. Some people complained that director Darren Aronofsky took too much liberty with the story (you know, rock giants, and all), but I was for the most part willing to accept the film for what it was. And when compared to “Exodus”, “Noah” looks like a biblical masterpiece.

There is just so much going on in “Exodus” and almost none of it is done well, and even the parts that are properly executed have been done before and been done better. The plagues are all visually impressive, and we get some engaging bird’s eye shots of ancient Egypt, but I mean it’s 2014; if your film doesn’t have good CGI at this point then you’re well behind the eight ball.

Speaking of the plagues, the direction they chose to take them was interesting. Instead of direct punishment from God, the film places blame on natural causes and chain-of-events, such as the Nile becoming polluted and killing the fish, which led to an overabundance of frogs, and so forth.

The acting in the film is all pretty standard, even with Bale trying his best. He has a few riveting moments as the historical figure, but the script is so flat and the character development is so non-existent that his efforts are wasted.

The film begins with adult Moses and Ramesses going into battle, so we only learn of their relationship as adopted brothers through stories and narration. When Moses returns after nine years of banishment, we do not see how the two brothers’ relationship is strained or how having to become enemies has placed stress on them. The film simply continues to go through the motions.

Ramesses is a one-dimensional character, whom we root against simply because the movie tells us to. By the time the big confrontation at the Red Sea arrives, you feel no real urge to root for his demise or see him or his army defeated (I mean, kind of spoiler, but you’ve had over 3,000 years to read the story).

Finally, the running time of this movie. Oh my God, the run time. To paraphrase “The Social Network”, since this thing started I think I may have missed a birthday. After learning of his true identity, Moses is exiled from Egypt for nine years. In all honestly, it felt like this movie lasted longer than Moses’ banishment. It is so painfully paced and at times uneventful, I brainstormed this whole paragraph while watching the film.

“Exodus: Gods and Kings” has huge ambitions but it showed limited effort to try and meet them. Bale elevates a bland script to the best of his ability, and the plagues and parting of the Red Sea are all good looking, but the film as a whole feels empty, and scenes that should be emotionally stirring range from tedious to almost laughable. I will leave you with an imploration to watch “Noah”, a biblical film that at its height is grand and awe-striking, and at its low is still much better than anything “Exodus” thought it was.

Critics Rating: 3/10

Horrible Accurate Description of ‘Bosses 2’

Horrible_Bosses_2            The moment they announced “Horrible Bosses 2” was a thing I scratched my head. I loved the first film, it remains one of my favorite comedies of all-time, but it just didn’t have substance to warrant a sequel. Then director Seth Gordon said he wouldn’t be returning and he was replaced with Sean Anders. All these were red flags but I held up hope that the returning cast would make this sequel work.

They couldn’t.

“Horrible Bosses 2” follows Nick, Kurt and Dale (Jason Bateman, Jason Sudeikis and Charlie Day) after they have quit their jobs and started their own business with their invention, The Shower Buddy. When they are scammed by an investor and his son (Christoph Waltz and Chris Pine), they decide their only course of action is to kidnap the son and hold him for ransom (because, duh).

I don’t really know where to start with this film, because it really is disappointing. Comedy sequels are rarely as good as the original (“22 Jump Street” excluded), but I expected “Horrible Bosses 2” to at least have the same tone as the first film. The writers of the original film, John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein, wrote a draft for this film but when Anders took over as director he and his writing partner John Morris reworked the script (the duo helped on the scripts of the scattershot but very funny “We’re the Millers” and “Hot Tub Time Machine”). Some of the first film’s bite and self-awareness still remain, but most of the jokes now are nothing more than poop and sex gags, which are Anders’ trademark.

The movie is paced in a way that just doesn’t work. It takes a full hour before the trio even discusses the kidnapping scheme, or at least it felt like that. This clearly was not an idea that could carry an entire film, so it was stretched by having an entire subplot involving Jennifer Aniston’s sex-crazed dentist. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for Jennifer Aniston, but when she starts to fantasize about 14-year-old boys at wrestling camp, you lost me.

Bateman, Day and Sudeikis (whom I love and believe is very underrated) all still have fun chemistry and give and take among each other, and Electro himself Jamie Foxx is back as Dean MF Jones, but they can’t save this sinking ship.

Christoph Waltz is criminally underused as the film’s antagonist (pun intended?), but there’s still something about seeing Hans Landa play a ruthless business man that put a smirk on my face. Pine seems to be having a blast as the spoiled son, who partners up with the trio in the hostage plan to get back at his dad. Kevin Spacey also returns for a few minutes as Dave Harken, but in the end that only made me miss the first film even more.

In retrospect, expectations for “Horrible Bosses 2” shouldn’t have been high, as they put “horrible” right in the title, alongside the number two, which is all this film is: poop.

There is a saving grace towards the end of the film with a few twists and an interestingly executed hostage plan, but that saving grace comes in the form of a bullet to the head, saving my soul from this unjustified, heart-crushing sequel.

Critics Rating: 4/10

‘Annabelle’ Boring, Lazy and Unscary

Annabelle-posterThere’s a trend I’ve noticed with Hollywood in 2014: if a title of a film is simply a female name, then the end product is trash. First we had “Tammy”, then “Lucy” and now “Annabelle”.

A prequel/spin-off/rip-off of “The Conjuring”, “Annabelle” tells the tale of how the creepy little doll became possessed in the first place, and how it torments the lives of a married couple and their newborn baby. The couple is played by Ward Horton and Annabelle Wallis (crazy first name, right?!) and the film is directed by John R. Leonetti.

I wasn’t the biggest “Conjuring” fan. I appreciated its production value and acting but I just didn’t find the film very scary. And like I said in my review, a horror film that isn’t scary is like a comedy without any laughs; it failed at its objective. That being said, if “Annabelle” was intended to be a horror film, then it botched even harder than “Conjuring” ever could have hoped to.

Nothing in this film works. Let’s start with the acting. It’s as wooden as the rocking chair that the Annabelle doll sits in the entire film. The actor’s deliveries are off and their emotions are non-existent. As my one friend brilliantly said to me, “you know you’re in trouble when the doll is the best actor in the movie.”

The script is just as awful as the acting. The plot makes no sense and puts no effort into explaining how Annabelle actually comes possessed, and it takes until the final scene to tell us why the demon is after the family. The dialogue is equally as dreadful. Like I’m perplexed as to how some of these scenes made it into the finished product. At one point the husband says “ha ha it’s true; everyone HATES her grandmother”. Like, in the most awkward tone possible. And nearly completely out of context to the conversation. That would mean the director had to have looked at that take and said, “Perfect! Cut. Print.”

Speaking of direction, Leonetti does nothing special here at all. All my issues with “Conjuring” aside, director James Wan (who produced “Annabelle”) knew how to build tension in a scene using practical effects (his mistake was never having much of the tension boil over and lead anywhere). Leonetti lingers on actors faces for too long and stares at a still Annabelle for extended durations. There were a couple interesting camera tricks he employs, such as showing a little girl running past an open door only to have her turn into a full-grown woman upon entering, but I think if you had simply put a camera on a tripod it would have done a more engaging job.

All of this could be forgiven if the film was scary, or even interesting, but “Annabelle” is neither. It is boring and uneventful, and by using all no-name actors to ensure the budget was as low as possible it’s not even like we have a big-name star to hold our hand (I would pay good money to see Nicolas Cage scream and throw the Annabelle doll).

I can go on and on bashing “Annabelle”, but then I would be just hurting my brain more than this film did by itself. It is a lazily constructed and awfully executed horror film that should be condemned alongside the demons that control its title character. The silver lining about nearing the end of this review is I will never have to revisit this film ever again. Well, except when I write my Year’s Worst Films list in December. Or until they milk yet another sequel out of this already dried up franchise and I have to relive it all over again…

Critics Rating: 3/10

‘Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles’ an Empty Shell

Teenage_Mutant_Ninja_Turtles_film_July_2014_poster            If I told you a film starred Megan Fox, was produced by Michael Bay and was directed by the guy behind “Battle Los Angeles”, you would probably not be interested. But wait! What if I also tell you that the very same movie was produced by Nickelodeon Studios? Interested now? If you’re over the age of eight, the answer is hopefully no, and the very film I just described to you is “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles”.

“Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” is based off the classic characters and follows them as they take on their first big challenge: The Shredder. That’s pretty much the extent of the plot of the film; giant talking turtles fighting a giant metal robot. Should be fun, right? (It’s not, though). Megan Fox, Will Arnett and William Fichtner star in non-reptile roles as Jonathan Liebesman directs.

I don’t think there’s a single person who thought this film was going to be good. First it took forever to get into production, and then Michael Bay annoyed everyone by saying the Turtles weren’t mutant but were actually aliens. And then there’s the fact that every film the director has made has a 5.8 on IMDb. Seems like there were a lot of red flags, and that was before the film’s awful trailer even debuted. If you’re waiting for a “however”, then don’t hold your breath; this film is every bit as not good as expected.

First things first the script is beyond bland. Every character in this film is a typecast, just a stereotypical personality that are found in most summer films. There’s the hot coworker who keeps asking the main character out, the boss who doesn’t believe the main character’s crazy story, and the reporter who wants bigger and better stories. People’s characterization is literally learned by lines by other characters (“you’re the most persistent person I’ve ever met, you know that?”)

There are aspects to “TMNT” that are head-scratchingly lazy. The film begins on the first day of spring, yet two scenes later the main character is at a snow-coated resort after a 20 minute drive from New York City. Why couldn’t the film take place in winter and erase this problem? I’m not sure, but what I am sure of is that I just put more time into thinking about this script than the writers did.

Oh, and the villain’s plot in this film is literally that of The Lizard’s in “The Amazing Spider-Man”, right down to infecting New York City with a chemical weapon by using a large antenna on top of a company’s skyscraper. Like I said. Lazy.

The action scenes, for the most part, are well-shot so I will give the film props where due. It is some fun seeing giant turtles throw human beings like they’re ragdolls into moving subway cars and trees, and the film does a good job at putting this on screen. However none of the action is engaging; it all feels contrived.

The Turtles really aren’t even the stars of the film, at least not for the first half. That honor falls into Megan Fox’s lap, and she does what she does best: gives a performance just passable enough to make us not hate her. When the Turtles do start to get screen time, it’s just potty humor and fan service references, neither of which work for a 20-year-old guy like me with limited Ninja Turtle knowledge.

“Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” isn’t an awful movie, and it is not the pop-culture mockery many feared, but it is by no means good and is just barely watchable. A lot of the time the film is boring, and when it’s not boring it will still be so not fun that it will make you ask yourself: “what the actual shell am I watching?”

Critics Rating: 4/10