This right here may be the saddest movie of 2015 overall. Not because it'll make you cry or anything, although you may depending on your feelings for it, but because there was so much potential that was just flushed down the toilet once director David O. Russell disowned the movie. Yes, the director of "The Fighter," "Silver Linings Playbook," and "American Hustle" made this movie. Originally "Accidental Love" went under the title "Nailed" and it was supposed to be a biting and hilarious political satire about the troubles people have to get what they want and how corrupt politics in general is. Unfortunately, the film itself went through financial troubles which caused Russell to leave the project and have others finish it for him. And now, seven years after going into production, we have the half-assed cut of a movie that, had it not been for the financial troubles, could have been pretty great.
Throughout the 101 minute duration, there are slivers of a great movie that leak out and show the potential this had. I'm not gonna lie: I laughed a couple of times. There were a few jokes and some sequences that kept me entertained and interested in where things were going. The actors seemed committed, and the satirical elements of the film itself felt genuine and on point. Unfortunately, what makes "Accidental Love" sad to watch is the fact that everyone's hard work put into this resulted in something mediocre and sloppy. If you're a fan of David O. Russell, it might be best for you to stay away from this. There honestly isn't any purpose or anything redeemable in seeing this. Had it not been for the financial troubles, I could have honestly seen this becoming a modern comedy cult classic. Thank goodness Russell and the actors involved went on to do bigger and better things, because this is just a sad bump in the road that I'm sure they all want to forget. I at least want to forget it. "Accidental Love" had potential, but in the end this is just a half-assed cut of what once could have been a hilarious political satire.
Cults are easy to be persuaded by, as shown in Riley Stearns' movie "Faults." Starring Leland Orser from "The Guest" and Mary Elizabeth-Winstead from such films as "Scott Pilgrim vs. The World" and "The Spectacular Now," "Faults" tells the story of the struggle two parents go through when dealing with their daughter, Claire, being taken into a mysterious cult called Faults. As a last ditch effort to get her out, Claire's parents call upon one of the world's foremost experts in the field of mind control, Ansel Roth, in order to do the deed. This film is one of the few times where I went into this knowing practically nothing about it, other than the cast and that it deals with cults. 90 minutes later, I emerged from the film with a strange awe pulsating through my eyes and mind.
This is one crazy and surreal movie, and it's one of those indie gems that I'd highly recommend seeking out. The performances are great, the story is captivating, Riley Stearns' writing/direction was on point and very impressive, and overall this is a movie that I really enjoyed. It drags a little bit and some performances are better than others, but honestly, this is something that really deserves to be seen and admired. If you haven't heard of "Faults" before, hopefully now you have, and I recommend seeing it. However, try to avoid the trailer if possible. It sells a different movie than what is delivered and kind of spoils some of the twists, turns, and surreal things that go on during the 90 minute duration.
It's been just over a year since the novel "Divergent" was adapted for the big screen, and since that film did so well, it only seems appropriate that the book's sequel would be adapted to the big screen as well. Alas, it was, and here we are with "The Divergent Series: Insurgent," now in post-converted 3D! I have to point out now that the 3D here is absolutely useless, so if you want to see this, save your money and see this in 2D if possible. It's taken me a few days to solidify my opinion on this, and I've finally reached a verdict: I enjoyed "Insurgent," plain and simple. Is the story convoluted at times? Yes. Do some characters get introduced only to barely be included in the main story? Absolutely. However, did the film keep me entertained and invested? Yes it very much did. If you're a fan of the "Divergent" books and/or the first film in the series, then I have a feeling you'll enjoy this one. It's fun, it's visually gorgeous, and it's well acted. If you're not a fan of these films, then don't waste your time going to see this because, let's face it, why pay for something you know you're not going to like? Honestly, that's really all I have to say about this.
Every year it seems we get a new(ish) Liam Neeson action thriller to take our money and showcase one of Hollywood's most badass stars being, well, a badass. This year we're privileged (depending on who you are) to get two within the first three months of 2015. The first one was "Taken 3," and the second one is "Run All Night." Re-teaming with "Unknown" and "Non-Stop" director Jaume Collet-Serra, Neeson stars as Jimmy, an aging mobster who ends up having one hell of a night where he kills the son of his best friend and mob boss Shawn, played by Ed Harris, in order to protect his own estranged son, played by Joel Kinnaman from last year's "Robocop" remake. Basically it's kind of like if "That's My Boy" or "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" were made into an R rated Liam Neeson action fiesta. Don't worry, that's a good thing.
Neeson, Kinnaman, and Harris all deliver solid performances here as their respected characters. Neeson shows that he's having fun while playing this alcoholic gangster who is trying to save his son and make things right for all the wrong he's done. Kinnaman is very convincing as Neeson's estranged son, giving the emotional punch that this film delivers well with. The best performance in the movie goes to Harris, who is very menacing and engaging as the main antagonist. Vincent D'onofrio, Genesis Rodriguez, and others make up the overall solid supporting cast. The problems in the film don't lie in the performance, but rather in the cheesy and even confused screenplay.
At the beginning of the film, Harris' character is against his son's actions and doesn't want anything to do with what he believes is right. However, his actions lead to his attempt on Liam Neeson's son's life, which causes Neeson to kill him. Out of nowhere, Harris suddenly has a change of heart and sets his mobsters and the NYPD against Neeson, his best and most loyal friend might I add, and his kid. This just felt like a complete 180 from what the film had been setting up Harris' character as. Also, there's a character played by Common who honestly felt like something that came straight out of a "Terminator" movie. Even when you think this character is done and over with, the film surprises you once again by having him still living and breathing, despite not making and logical sense whatsoever. I know you're supposed to turn your brain off during these types of films, but here, I honestly couldn't. Luckily these problems didn't stop me from enjoying the film as a whole.
In a nut shell, this is a flawed and formulaic action movie. There are a lot of ridiculous and implausible moments that happen here, and there are some characters who motives aren't quite logical. Having said that, I managed to get lost in most of the action and on screen chemistry between Neeson and Kinnaman, and at the end of the day I came out of this happy that I saw it. It might not be as deep or as awesome as "The Grey," but it's still a fun Liam Neeson action movie overall that I'd recommend seeing with friends, whether that's in the theater or at home. Plus if you watch it with friends, I bet a drinking game could be made out of this. Either that, or being under the influence while watching this may elevate the film's more absurd moments into sheer hilarity for you. At the end of the day, "Run All Night" is another fun entry into Liam Neeson's supposedly unstoppable reign of action films. Not as smart or fun as some of his previous flicks, but overall it's a solid two hour thrill ride that is sure to entertain you at least partially.
Ballsy, tongue-in-cheek, and downright awesome are just a few of the many ways to describe "Kingsman: The Secret Service." The latest outing from "Kick-Ass" and "X-Men: First Class" director Matthew Vaughn boasts a very strong cast, including the likes of Colin Firth and Samuel L. Jackson. The film tells of a secret British organization filled with proper, classy, and badass gentlemen spies, with Firth's Harry Hart attempting to recruit a young recluse living in the ghetto part of England named Eggsy, played by Taron Egerton. Without going into too much detail, there is a villain who is trying to take over the world, and it's up to the Kingsman to stop him before it's too late. The description given is intentionally vague and generic, because going further into detail with this film may just take out a good amount of the fun present here. "Kingsman" is a film that both pokes fun at old spy films as well as pay homage to them, which as a whole helps to make it one hell of an entertaining ride.
First and foremost, this movie is a true testament to Vaughn's undeniably talented and precise eye to storytelling. From the fast-paced exchanges of dialogue to the brutally spectacular action sequences, he definitely shows that he has a true eye for giving the audience a bloody good time, pun intended. There's a very controversial scene that happens in the middle of the film that involves a shootout inside a church, and honestly, this was my favorite scene of the film. Not only was the action well choreographed and the editing swift and graceful, but the song that goes along with the scene is, for lack of a better term, perfect. If Vaughn was ever to have a director reel to show off what he's done, I would put this and the big shootout scene from "Kick-Ass" set to Joan Jett's rendition "My Generation" front and center. After this and his other two big hits, I don't see anything that can stop his career anytime soon.
It's extremely ironic to have someone as classy and elegant as Colin Firth playing the character of Harry Hart. In case you don't recall, Firth received his Academy Award for playing the stuttering and timid Duke of York in "The King's Speech." If you imagine the exact opposite of how that character was, then you'd basically get what you see here. In short, Firth is a straight up badass here, and arguably the best thing about the movie entirely. From his witty jokes and comments to his amazing moves in the action scenes, Firth stole the show from everyone here. Honestly, he was the absolute perfect choice to play this character, and I couldn't see anyone else doing Harry Hart justice.
Everyone else in the cast, ranging from relative newcomer Taron Egerton as the film's lead protagonist Eggsy to Samuel L. Jackson as the charismatic lisp-bearing villain Richmond Valentine, all add to the comedy and the fun this movie has and overall give great performances. The visual effects are stellar, the humor really hits, and the action is just a lot of fun to watch. Honestly I could go on and on about this film, but truth be told, this is just something that should be experienced on the big screen. "Kingsman" is raunchy, violent, and unapologeticly awesome. It's the hybrid of the "James Bond" series and "Attack the Block" that you never knew you wanted to see. If you haven't seen this film yet, then I'd definitely recommend checking it out as soon as possible. This is one of the best movies of 2015 thus far, and it's Vaughn's best film in my eyes other than "Kick-Ass."
If you love tabloid websites like TMZ, then chances are you may hate David Cronenberg's "Maps to the Stars." If there was ever a movie that both glorifies and flips off the Hollywood culture, this would be it. Julianne Moore won Best Actress at the Cannes Film Festival last year for this film, and deservedly so in my eyes. Moore, along with Mia Wasikowska, John Cusack, and other recognizable celebrities make up this ensemble piece about the horrors that lie behind the scenes of the lives of actors and filmmakers. It's fascinating to see Julianne Moore's character trying to get a role that was originated by her late mother while her ghost haunts her subconscious, while at the same time Evan Bird, the film's scene-stealer in my eyes, plays a teen heartthrob who is trying to make a sequel to the film that made him famous after getting out of drug rehabilitation. And then Wasikowska shows up out of the blue to stir up the lives of everyone she meets, including those previously mentioned.
Every character in their own way is a flawed individual, which is what makes them all the more fascinating to watch. Moore and Bird in particular steal every scene they're in, which is truly a testament to how well written the characters are. This is the first film I've seen from David Cronenberg's catalog, and I'm glad it was. This biting Hollywood satire might be flawed, particularly in the structure of the third act and the dragging nature of the film, but at the end of the day it is extremely entertaining and worthy of a watch. Definitely not a movie that will appeal to everyone, but it's definitely something that will leave some type of impact on you once it ends.
RELEASE
March 13, 2015 (NY/LA)
March 20, 2015 (Expands)
DIRECTOR
David Robert Mitchell
STUDIO
Radius-TWC
RUNNING TIME
1 hour 34 minutes
STARS
***3/4
REVIEW:
There are people out there who believe that the 80s showcased some of the scariest films out there. David Robert Mitchell seems to be one of those individuals, and thanks to that has made a movie that not only exploits the tropes of 80s horror flicks, but celebrates them at the same time. "It Follows" acts as something of a PSA for abstinence as the story is of a girl who starts being followed by an apparition only she can see after a seemingly normal sexual encounter. Aside from one scene, there isn't a single jump scare present whatsoever throughout this flick's 94 minute duration. Instead, the film gets its scares from the atmospheric creepiness and intensity brought in the style of suspense and thrills, with the occasional moments of humor put in there to lighten the mood. It's because of this, along with many other things, that makes the film well worth seeing.
Maika Monroe is an actress that I would suggest looking out for. Most recently she was in "The Guest," but even there she was second-billed to Dan Stevens. She gets the ability to be the main star of this film as the latest victim of this paranormal being, Jay. First off, I just have to point out that this actress has something about her look that reminds me a lot of Brie Larson, aka the lead in "Short Term 12." Getting that out of the way, I thought Monroe really brought a lot to her performance and was a smart and fun protagonist to journey along with. Unlike most lady protagonists in horror films, Jay is quick on her feet, manages to think of ways to escape the invisible being, and even gets her friends to believe that she actually is being terrorized by a creature nobody else can see. Monroe, along with Keir Gilchrist from "It's Kind of a Funny Story," are charming and engaging enough to keep the audience invested. However, they're not the best things in the movie in my honest opinion.
The thing that constantly keeps coming to mind when I think of this film is the soundtrack. Rich Vreeland, better known as "Disasterpiece," has created an eerie, retro, and overall awesome collection of music that pays tribute to the great and atmospherically creepy horror films of the 1980's. The music itself is reminiscent of recent homages to the films of the 1980's, as well as some of my personal favorites of the decade thus far, "Drive" and "The Guest." Ironically enough, the latter happens to star Maika Monroe as well. The songs are pulpy, hypnotic, and get stuck in your head and stay there long after the film's over. The two standouts on the soundtrack for me were the "Title" track and the song "Detroit." Both set the tone for this creepy and inventive horror flick.
David Robert Mitchell has made one hell of a horror flick here. While not necessarily "scary," the film has a constant sense of intensity and suspense at its core, which in return puts fear into the audience. There's only one remotely cheap jump scare in the movie, because the real scares of the movie come in the fact that you don't know what's going to happen. There's a scene in particular involving a figure walking in the distance from a group of characters talking that is both intense, frightening, and extremely inventive. There's even some comedic bits that are present that help to keep the mood light and the audience not constantly covering their eyes. Not to mention, the cinematography is gorgeous and helps the eerie vibe to be present throughout the film's 94 minute running time. Despite the ending feeling a little forced in trying to set up for what's to come next, this is definitely a movie that I highly recommend checking out. It's the most original, intense, and fun horror movie to come out since "The Cabin in the Woods" to me, and something that I strongly recommend you seeking out if and/or when it comes to a theater near you. Seeing this with an audience is an added bonus to seeing such a great horror movie.
Let's face it: practically nobody was asking for a live-action remake of one of Disney's most iconic films, that being the 1950 classic "Cinderella." Aside from Disney seeking out some easy money, there really wasn't any reason to take such a beloved animated flick and remake it as a live-action film with actors your children probably don't even know. Having said that, I sure as hell am glad that they remade it, because what has been delivered here is something truly special in my eyes. Does it have the same exact story and outcome as the original? Absolutely, but that surprisingly doesn't take away from what director Kenneth Branagh and screenwriter Chris Weitz have accomplished here. What these two accomplish is a lavish, classy, and well-told rendition of a story that many people know and love with a lot more meat on the bone than what the original animated classic offered.
The true standout of the film for me has to be Lily James' performance as the titular character. Best known for her work on "Downton Abbey," James presents herself as a gentle, smart, and internally beautiful person that is actually be a better portrayal of Cinderella than in the animated film. The thing that I appreciated most about the casting of James in this role is that, for lack of a better explanation, she isn't "hot." What I mean by that is that she is a very attractive, cute, and pretty young actress, but she isn't someone that many people would call "sexy," which in this day and age is very rare to come by. Her cuteness adds to the believability that she is this mistreated individual. Same goes for Richard Madden's portrayal of the Prince. He too isn't a "sexy" man, but an attractive and charming enough guy to make you believe that he is just a young man looking for true love. This goes into the next thing I loved about this film: their chemistry together.
Unlike the animated film, Cinderella and the Prince don't meet for the first time at the dance. Rather, Cinderella is running away from some troubles when the Prince and his gang happen to be chasing a deer at the same time. They end up meeting in the woods privately, and they share a few flirtatious lines together. In fact, it is because of this encounter that the Prince wants to hold the infamous ball, unlike in the original where the King holds it so The Prince could choose his bride then and there. This adds more of a dynamic between the characters and a new way of seeing two iconic characters falling in love. The idea of "love at first sight" is pretty ridiculous, but it's hard to deny that, when these two meet for the first time, they're infatuated with one another. And luckily, we're given time to watch them fall in love as the film progresses.
Speaking of ridiculous things, Helena Bonham Carter pops up for a scene as the infamous Fairy Godmother. Now, here's something that I have to give the original props for: making the Fairy Godmother a motherly figure. Don't get me wrong, I thought Bonham Carter was really fun and did a well done job in her role. My only nitpick with her is that she doesn't portray a motherly figure, rather takes on the persona of the "cool aunt" who buys you awesome presents when you see her every 6-7 months. Other than that, I honestly have no problems with the cast. Even the goofy stepsisters in the movie had the right amount of slap-sticky humor where it felt appropriate and not too forced.
Another actress who delivers on a great performance is Cate Blanchett, who plays the infamously evil stepmother Lady Tremaine. She is diabolical, sly, and overall a really engaging villain. What I found to be the most interesting thing about the character is that we actually hear her motive for why she does what she does to Cinderella. Surprisingly, it's not for the sole purpose of being an evil "witch" of sorts, rather it's something that, frankly, I can actually understand. It's also fascinating to see her, along with Cinderella's parents, and what they do to effect the overall plot of the movie, unlike in the animated film where they're place in Cinderella's life is merely just a piece of exposition. Even the King in the film is a more fleshed out character than the bumbling fat persona from the original. Sorry for constantly going back to the original film, it's just hard not to compare the two.
Before I ramble on more about what else this does to improve on the original, I'll mention the other things that make this film great. Kenneth Branagh was a great choice as a director here, plain and simple. Comparing this to his work on "Thor" and "Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit" is rather unfair due to how vastly different those are to this. Being a man who's a Shakespearean-trained actor, Branagh manages to get the best performances out of his actors, as well as tell a tale that, while familiar, feels new again. Not to mention, there are several sequences, particularly the ball scene and the first encounter between Cinderella and the Prince, that are really well directed and well executed. Overall, Branagh delivered on making a timeless story feel new again, and in the process even made this new film something of a soon-to-be timeless gem.
As someone who actually enjoyed 2007's "The Golden Compass," my interest actually peaked when I saw screenwriter Chris Weitz join the project. Sure enough, the dialogue was well written, the added material actually gave the story a lot more meat on the bones, and as a whole wrote a really good, sweet, and kind screenplay that I believe deserves a lot more credit than it may get at the end of the day. The production design and the costumes are absolutely gorgeous to look at, so good that they may be early contenders for Costume and Production Design accolades at next year's Academy Awards. The cinematography and visual effects also help to showcase the scope and wonderment inside this lavish kingdom. Overall, the technical and literal elements featured helped to give the movie the extra push from good to great, for me at least.
At the end of the day, "Cinderella" was a very pleasant surprise. Featuring great performances, solid direction, a well-written script, and some beautiful technical aspects, this film goes beyond being a good film and becomes something that is sweet, innocent, and very likable on a broad spectrum. Even the most cynical and hardest of people won't be able to resist the charm that this movie possesses. Not to mention, the message about being generous and kind to others is something that is great to see in a world where toilet humor and dumb innuendos are the norm. This isn't just a great family movie; it's a great movie. And, dare I say it, it's even a fantastic movie. "Cinderella" is one of the year's best movies thus far, and compared to the other Disney live action remakes to come out within the past five years, those being "Alice in Wonderland" and "Maleficent," this is definitely the best of them.
In high school, kids are subjected to different cliques and groups and clubs that they can be in. This leads to them being labeled as "jock," "nerd," "popular," or any other term you can think of. There's even a term for the "third wheel" of a group of friends, and that term is "duff." "DUFF" stands for "Designated Ugly Fat Friend, and that is the label that Mae Whitman's character in the new film "The Duff" gets attached to. It's easy to expect romance, slapstick, and cliches galore in a film like this, as this isn't the first teen chick-flick comedy to come out. However, it's nice when looks can be deceiving. Within the love triangles, girly montages, and predictable plot-lines is a sweet, charming, and even legitimately funny movie that I enjoyed more than I expected to.
If you're a teen girl, chances are you're going to love this film. If you're a guy who's dragged along to see this, you may very well be surprised at the overall quality of this flick. It's no "Mean Girls" or "Easy A," but it still holds its own and manages to stand strong on its own, making this a movie that I would definitely recommend checking out. The chemistry between Whitman and Amell is great, the story is charming, and the film as a whole is a satisfactory time at the theater. The only downsides to the film are its predictability and a rather one dimensional performance from teen starlet Bella Thorne. Other than that, this is a really fun film overall. So, if you're looking for a teen film that isn't part of a multi-million dollar franchise, or you just want to see a movie adaptation of a book that doesn't have any odd sexual content (for the most part), then I'd definitely say to check out "The Duff" whenever possible.
Time to throw logic out the window, because "The Spongebob Movie: Sponge Out of Water" is one of the trippiest, most insane and bizarrely fun kids movies of this generation. Despite being a sequel to the fantastic "The Spongebob Squarepants Movie" that came out 11 years ago, this one has not a single mention of the first film's events whatsoever. And you know what? I was totally fine with that. Basically the story of the film is this: the Krabby Patty secret formula goes missing, causing Bikini Bottom to go into full anarchy mode, and it's up to Spongebob and Mr. Krabs' arch-nemesis Plankton to find it and get it back. There's also a pirate in the film played by Antonio Banderas, and the iconic sea-creatures do end up going "out of water" into the live action world, but that only comes in the last half hour of the 92 minute film.
Most of the film actually had 2D animation, and let me tell you, it was absolutely gorgeous to look at. Don't let the trailers and the poster fool you: this is a much different "Spongebob" movie than you'd expect, and I say that in the best way possible. This movie is absurd, insane, and unpredictably fun, and even though it has flaws that are to be expected from a kids film like this, it's hard to deny the effort that the filmmakers actually put into this. I haven't watched a single episode of the series since the show started going to shambles back in 2005, so seeing this is pretty refreshing and reminisces of a time where the show took chances and made some hilarious and subtly dirty jokes along the way. If this is any indication that "Spongebob" could return to its old school roots and deliver on making teens and adults laugh, then sign me up for more, because this film is definitely worth checking out.
If you're looking for a darkly funny, twisted, and psychologically insane movie, then "The Voices" might be right up your alley. Starring Ryan Reynolds, Anna Kendrick, and a slew of other familiar faces, this is a film that distributor Lionsgate, in my opinion, totally missed the mark on with this. I mean, this isn't the most conventional of dark-comedy/psychological thrillers, but it still could have made some solid money had it been marketed and released wide enough. Instead, they gave it a cheap, lazy, and uninspired On Demand release to coincide with a limited theater run at the same time. I complain about this because this isn't just any film that deserves to be thrown into theater like a piece of garbage. This movie not only premiered at the 2014 Sundance Film Festival to rave reviews, but it also played at several festivals following that, including the Toronto International Film Festival. Without going into too much detail, basically Ryan Reynolds is a paranoid schizophrenic who talks to his dog Bosco, a representation of good, and his cat Mr. Whiskers, a representation of evil. Oh, I should probably mention that the pets are also voiced by Reynolds.
Personally, I believe this is a film that is best to go into without knowing a whole lot. Knowing to much would ruin the countless surprises that lie within this twisted flick. Ryan Reynolds is superb here, playing the creepy yet sympathetic Jerry in such a way that you'll never look at the actor the same way again. He's also great as the cat and dog, each sporting their own unique voice that makes them unique and fun. Gemma Arterton, Anna Kendrick, and Jacki Weaver are also very good here, but this is Reynolds show at the end of the day. As a current student in Psychology class, the representation of schizophrenia was both dead on and really fascinating to watch.
There's a scene that immediately comes to mind where Jerry, well, stops hearing the voices, and what the audience sees is how not so perfect his home life is, which is very heartbreaking to witness. It's not the most perfect film out there, as there were times where it felt like director Marjane Satrapi didn't know how to accurately blend the psychological thriller and dark comedy genres well, but that doesn't take away from how cleverly written, well acted and directed, and sharply told the film is at the end of the day. It took me a few minutes to fully digest what I had seen, and I am overall extremely satisfied with what has been delivered. If you're looking for a darkly funny, shockingly sadistic, and overall fascinating look into the life of one messed up dude, then definitely check out "The Voices" when you get the chance.
MOVIE
