"Don Jon" Review

The first film written, directed, and starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Don Jon is a dramedy about a porn-addicted man struggling to find happiness and intimacy.

The theme this film presents is the problem with developing unrealistic expectations about relationships. It’s an interesting concept, but its execution obviously had a lot of thought put into it. It didn’t just hit the same note over and over again. I should note that this film was independently financed. Don Jon is definitely a very hard ‘R’ and I have a hard time believing that aside from distribution, any studio would touch it with a 10-foot pole. With that said, the film is bold and doesn’t shy away from much – which I definitely respect.

As with many first films however, it wasn’t flawless. There were times where it felt like the film was being stretched out to meet a feature-length run-time. The movie juggles a lot of different sub-plots, and occasionally it seems a bit unfocused at where it wants to put emphasis. And while for the most part the dialogue was great, there was still the occasional awkward line used to drive home a point or get out of a scene.

This movie is definitely not a date movie. Nor is it a great movie to see with your parents. It’s not a sweet, Nicolas Sparks-type romantic comedy. It’s not a raunchy comedy either. If it doesn’t sound like your thing, it probably isn’t. However, I thought it was great. It made me laugh. It made me cry. It made me think. 8/10.

"Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs 2" Review

I’ll be the first to admit how surprised I was at the quality of this film. As the sequel to 2009’s Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs, and with new writers and directors, I was anticipating it to fall flat on its face. I began to make fun of it, calling it ‘2 Cloudy 2 Meatballs.’ I still generally refer to it as that, but it’s now a loving gesture in my mind.

I think this film’s biggest strength is that it’s self-aware. The opening credit to the movie is “A film by a lot of people”. After seeing trailers to this film, I was convinced it would be just a bunch of bad puns aimed at the enjoyment of kids. And only kids. However, everything is delivered with a perfectly placed wink and nod that make the jokes really work. In Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs 2, after the island is evacuated, it is taken over by mutant food beasts. After a hysterical Jurassic Park (1993) rip-off, Sam Sparks (Anna Faris) questions, “How did this even happen?” To which Flint Lockwood (Bill Hader) breaks the fourth wall and says (and I’m paraphrasing), “I have no idea. Let’s never talk about it again.” Moments like this where it lets you know not to take anything seriously sets up a wonderful tone that even had me cracking up at some of the puns.

The animation on this film is absolutely brilliant. The attention to detail in creating unique new worlds (and I’m not just referring to the food island) creates a colorful mood and draws you in. The character movements and subtle background details make the film much more enjoyable. I can say that I was never bored watching this movie. Even when the plot slows down, the animation is so enticing it kept me interested the entire time.

Is the plot original? Well, not exactly. It definitely follows the Hollywood formula. You understand what’s going to happen before it happens. However, the magic in this movie isn’t the story, it’s the execution. The tone was spot-on and the animation was amazing. It succeeds where a lot of other kids movies fail – it’s entertaining for all ages (so long as you don’t take yourself too seriously). I couldn’t stop smiling the entire film. Thus far, this is my favorite animated film of the year. 8/10.

"Rush" Review

Written by Peter Morgan and Directed by Ron Howard, the story follows the six-year rivalry of Formula One drivers James Hunt and Niki Lauda. However, with the two-hour length of the film, the script only delivers on the basic plot points and forgets much of the tension in the story. You could say that the movie is a bit... Rushed. Each scene presented serves an overly-obvious purpose that is aggravatingly shoved in your face. The dialogue is unfortunately used to develop the characters in a one-dimensional manner; it's emotionally manipulative and has a sole purpose of driving home a few key points in the scene. Everything is presented in an overly simplified black-and-white manner, even when trying to create complex characters and situations.

The remarkable strange pacing takes away from the drama in the story. Moments seem to drag; moments seem to pass too quickly. While struggling to fit six years of rivalry into a feature length film, the plot seems to haphazardly play a highlight reel. For example, Lauda and Hunt go from being Formula 3 racers to competing for the world championship seemingly overnight. There is neither drama in their ascension nor drama in other competition. With exception to Hunt and Lauda, nearly every other driver in this movie is a faceless name.

That said, if there is tension anywhere, it is in the rivalry between the two drivers. The performances of Chris Hemsworth as Hunt and Daniel Brühl as Lauda are the high points of the film. The cinematography for this film is stunning. If you walk in hoping to get some cool racing scenes, you'll get your moneys worth. Without getting too emotionally involved, simply watching the film is fun enough. By all means the execution of the script was great, it was just the script itself that was lacking.

On the whole I did enjoy this film. It's not the Oscar-movie it's hyped up to be, but it's definitely above average. The performances are great and the races are magnificent. While I never was hugely emotionally involved due to a weak script, I still enjoyed it. 6/10.

"Prisoners" Review

Canadian filmmaker Denis Villeneuve directs this crime thriller about the kidnapping of two 6-year old girls. Executive produced by Mark Wahlberg, this film features an A-list cast of Hugh Jackman, Jake Gyllenhaal, Melissa Leo, Viola Davis, Maria Bello, Terrence Howard, and Paul Dano. With a production budget of 46 million dollars, Prisoners opened at #1 at the box office at 21.4 million.

Jake Gyllenhaal gives a relatively solid performance as Detective Loki, however, he is overshadowed by Hugh Jackman’s portrayal of Keller Dover, a survivalist father who is faced with the moral dilemma of how far he should go to protect his family. In my opinion this is one of Jackman’s best performances. Paul Dano is also fantastic with his quiet portrayal of a mentally handicapped man accused of kidnapping the children. While none of the other performances stand out, all of the big-name actors are given a lot to do and are all very good. If nothing else, the performances in this movie are worth the price of admission.

The movie itself is also very well made. The cinematography is absolutely gorgeous. I had a couple problems with the editing and transitions between scenes, but these problems are minor and pretty subjective. The movie seems to move with a slow deliberateness that builds up the tension until it reaches a peak, resulting in remarkably intense moments several times throughout the film.

Prisoners has a 2 and a half hour run time, and while you’re never bored or waiting for it to end, its length and the amount of drama certainly takes its toll. While the script is very strong and the story is very powerful, it could certainly be tightened up. Without spoiling too much, there is specific emphasis placed on certain elements near the middle of the film that end up having very little to do with the rest of the story. And while I loved the bittersweetness and uncertainty in the final shot of the film, I wasn’t as big of a fan of the rest of the ending. The villain frankly lacked the necessary motivation to make the movie seem complete.

On the whole, this is a great film. The performances are wonderful. The film is incredibly tense. And while it’s a bit long, it’s never a chore to watch. While it’s not a perfect film, it’s one I would definitely recommend. 8/10.

"The Family" Review

Executive produced by Martin Scorsese and directed by Luc Besson, this mafia comedy stars Robert De Niro, Michelle Pfeiffer, and Tommy Lee Jones. On a production budget of approximately 30 million dollars, The Family made about 14 million at the box office on its opening weekend. 

There was so much talent behind this project, it’s a shame it turned out the way it did. Robert De Niro plays the same mobster character he’s played plenty of times before, and completely phones it in. I know that with exception to Silver Linings Playbook (2012), De Niro hasn’t had a ton of great roles recently, but it’s still such a shame to see him wasted like this. Tommy Lee Jones essentially plays grumpy cat, a role that is all too familiar to him as well. Michelle Pfeiffer at least goes for an accent, though it’s weird and inconsistent. None of the performances are particularly bad, but none of them are even remotely memorable.

The weakest part of this film however, is its script. It follows a family of mobsters, but splits them up into uninteresting subplots. You go throughout the movie expecting the subplots to come together in some sort of aggravating albeit clever way, but they never do. They serve no purpose to the plot other than filler-time. There are a few fun moments, but for the most part the film just incoherently wanders around.

This film had so much potential, which makes it all the more disappointing that it’s as weak as it is. There’s not much to outright hate about it, but it’s just not a lot of fun. I wouldn’t spend money on it, but if you saw this movie on TV and watched it while you did homework, it might not be the worst thing ever. 3/10.

"Insidious: Chapter 2" Review

Insidious: Chapter 2 took in 41 million dollars on a 5 million dollar production budget this Friday the 13^th weekend. Horror Filmmaker James Wan continues directorial duties and is credited alongside screenwriter and actor Leigh Whannell for the story. Patrick Wilson stars as the father of the haunted Lambert family.

I should say, while I loved Saw (2004) and was okay with The Conjuring (2013), I actively disliked Insidious (2010). I hated Insidious: Chapter 2 even more however. While the original didn’t provide any scary moments, I was still able to laugh along and have a certain amount of fun with the demons. With the lackluster demons in this movie however, it feels like the filmmakers didn’t even try. And while loud music and poorly executed jump scares are nothing new to this series, they’re more aggravating than horrifying. This film’s cardinal offense is that it’s just not scary. It’s boring.

If one good thing could be said about the script, it’s that it attempts to explain some of the occurrences in the original film. There are moments that make you say ‘Oh. So that’s why that happened.’ However, these moments are ruined by the plot-holes they bring along. Now, I know I shouldn’t be chastising a horror film for not having a smart script, but these moments really take you out of the film. That’s not to say there was much to invest you in the first place though. The characters lack motivation and most of the story is just kind apathetically presented to you.

James Wan isn’t a terrible filmmaker. Leigh Whannell isn’t a terrible writer. There are a few scenes that you can tell were inspired, and you can actually feel some emotion from. However, for the most part, this film feels like a cash grab for everyone involved. It’s not scary. It’s not fun. It’s just an exhaustively boring waste of time. 2/10.

"Riddick" Review

A while back, Vin Diesel agreed to make a cameo in The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006) in exchange for the rights to the “Riddick” franchise. Riddick is financed independently and Diesel even leveraged his house in order to fund it. On it’s opening weekend it earned 19 million domestically on its 38 million dollar production budget.

I find the production story behind Riddick to be absolutely inspiring. I only wish I enjoyed the movie as much as I enjoyed hearing about the passion that went into it. The effort definitely shows, and I think the lack of studio involvement makes it a more entertaining film. I love that they went for an uncompromising ‘R’ rating, and I love that the storyline doesn’t follow the traditional Hollywood formula, but I didn’t have nearly as much fun as I was hoping I would.

This isn’t a case where I didn’t like it and don’t understand why other’s do though. The “Riddick” franchise is definitely a cult franchise, and I can totally understand somebody having a ton of fun watching this. It’s just not for me. The film never hit me on an emotional level. I was never bored while watching this movie, but I was never invested in it. If you’re in the right mindset and/or love these survivalist action-thrillers, I would definitely recommend it. From a traditional standpoint however, it’s nothing special. For me, it was neither bad nor good. It just existed. 5/10.