"Labor Day" Review

Adapted from a Joyce Maynard novel, Labor Day is directed by Jason Reitman. However, it stands out from Reitman’s other films, including Thank You for Smoking (2005), Juno (2007), and Up in the Air (2009), because of a distinct lack of cynicism and dark comedy. Starring Gattlin Griffith, Kate Winslet, and Josh Brolin, this romantic-drama tells of an escaped convict (Brolin) who takes refuge at a single mother’s (Winslet) home.

Labor Day is soppy, melodramatic, and completely unrealistic. The entire film screams of a school-girl’s romantic fantasy. A tall, dark, and handsome man, on the run from the law, comes to the rescue of a heartbroken mother. The man isn’t dangerous, he’s just misunderstood. He’s sweet, great with kids, and an amazing cook. Their love has to be kept a secret though, because of the overly aware neighbors and ever-present police. It’s incredibly similar to the type of contrived garbage you’d find in a Nicolas Sparks’ novel.

It’s obvious that the actors are all trying their best, but they’re just not given a lot to do. The extent of Winslet’s part never goes past shaking and looking helpless. Brolin seems restrained, and doesn’t attain his normal screen presence. Griffith, playing the main character and eyes for the audience, is surprisingly solid for a child actor, and holds the film together. JK Simmons, Clark Gregg, and James Van Der Beek have supporting roles, but they never appear for more than a scene or two.

As the title would suggest, Labor Day primarily takes place over a long Labor Day weekend, and it feels that long, even with a sub-2 hour runtime. The pacing is slow, and there are plenty of scenes that don’t contribute much to the story. The scenes move with a particular stillness that makes it feel as if time were standing still.

Labor Day marks Tobey Maguire's second film in a row where he serves as narrator, the first being The Great Gatsby (2013). Labor Day suffers the same unfortunate fate as Gatsby; it’s obvious a lot of talented people worked on the movies, but the contributions didn’t result in a coherent film. Although Labor Day is much more balanced and less grating than The Great Gatsby, you don’t need to see it unless you’re sure it’s your type of movie. 4/10

"That Awkward Moment" Review

The written and directorial debut of Tom Gormican, this romantic comedy stars Zac Efron, Michael B. Jordan, Miles Teller, and Imogen Poots. Going into it, I was excited for this film. Despite some questionable movies he's been in, I still like Zac Efron. After Chronicle (2012) and Fruitvale Station (2013), I'm sold on Michael B. Jordan. And Miles Teller shows a lot of promise, after a knock-out performance in The Spectacular Now (2013), and rave reviews for his upcoming Whiplash (2014), which just took the Grand Jury Prize at Sundance. Brandon Trost as Director of Photography was the cherry on top.

The story follows three friends as they find themselves in "That Awkward Moment" in a relationship, where you have to decide where it's headed. After Mikey's (Jordan) wife decides she wants a divorce, Jason (Efron) and Daniel (Teller) vow to stay single with him, with mixed to poor results.

The actors in That Awkward Moment are all very charismatic, and they work well together. The dialogue is fast-paced and effective. Although there's nothing too amazingly hysterical in the film, it's very charming throughout - even in its crudeness. The pacing is fast, and the film stays in the "entertaining, but nothing too special" place the entire way through.

The film is a bit unbalanced, however. It leans heavily towards the relationship between Efron and Poots, and skims the other two. On top of this, the story is as formulaic as it gets. There are a few subtle surprises, but for the most part it's pretty trite. The characters lack dimension and the plot lacks realism.

On the whole, That Awkward Moment is a bit disappointing. I wouldn't say it's a bad movie though. The cast's charisma carries the film, and makes it relatively enjoyable. With a lesser cast, it would be much worse. 6/10

"I, Frankenstein" Review

I like to think of I, Frankenstein as a spin-off of The Dark Knight (2008). After Aaron Eckhart's Harvey Dent turns into "Two-Face" and falls off that building, his memory is wiped and he believes he's Frankenstein's monster, caught in a war between angels and demons. At least, that's what I chose to believe while watching Aaron Eckhart do his best Batman impression in this Stuart Beattie-directed film, adapted from the classic Mary Shelley book and a Kevin Grevioux graphic novel.

After a quick montage outlining how Frankenstein's monster (Eckhart) killed his creator's wife (and indirectly Dr. Frankenstein himself), he is attacked by demons, but saved by the Gargoyle Order. He is then named Adam and learns of the battle between angels (that are Gargoyles), led by Leonore (Miranda Otto), and demons (that are nameless faces in suits), led by Prince Naberius (Bill Nighy). To maintain a PG-13 rating, there is very little blood. Instead, the demons "descend" - by turning into orange beams of light; the angels "ascend" - by turning into blue beams of light. At 92 minutes, I, Frankenstein is small in scope. This works to the film's advantage though. While I, Frankenstein feels like it ends too quickly, it maintains a fast pace throughout. 

It's nothing too innovative, but the special effects in the film are fun to look at. The creature designs are one-note but nonetheless interesting. The fight choreography is also very solid. The Wolverine (2013) Director of Photography Ross Emery does the cinematography, and it's dark but aesthetically pleasing.

All of the actors in I, Frankenstein look like they're having a great time. The characters are one-dimensional, but the performances are fun. Bill Nighy plays the villain, and he's a joy to watch. Aaron Eckhart's talents are wasted here, but he's anything but apathetic.

I, Frankenstein has a very serious tone, but I don't think you should watch it as a very serious film. The movie becomes much more entertaining when you laugh along with the over-the-top performances and absurd plot. I don't know if campy was the goal or not, but everyone involved clearly put in a lot of effort. Eckhart trained for six months to handle all of the fight choreography. While passionate filmmaking doesn't necessarily bring good results on a technical level, it typically makes a film much more exciting. I, Frankenstein may not be a "great" movie, but it certainly isn't boring. How much you'll enjoy it depends on how serious you take it. 5/10

"Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit" Review

Based on the popular novels by the late Tom Clancy, Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit stars Chris Pine as cinema's fourth Jack Ryan (after Alec Baldwin, Harrison Ford, and Ben Affleck). Directed by Kenneth Branagh, this reboot isn't based on any particular novel in the series. Jack Ryan is a CIA analyst who uncovers a Russian plot to crash the U.S. economy.

On a technical level, there's not really anything wrong with the film. The performances are all adequate. Chris Pine does a fine job. Keira Knightley is decent as Jack Ryan's girlfriend, despite not being given a ton to do. Kenneth Branagh is a fine villain, and Kevin Costner has certainly given worse performances than his take of CIA department head and mentor Thomas Harper. The cinematography is all good. It's easy to look at, but it's nothing too special or inspired. And while the script is nothing to cheer about, there's nothing wrong with it on a fundamental level.

Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit's biggest problem is that there's not a lot of voice to it. It's directed by Kenneth Branagh, but you'd never know that unless you looked it up before viewing the film. There's a certain lack of heart to it that disengages you from the film. Without a clear voice, you're left feeling apathetic while the movie goes through the motions.

The film doesn't do a lot that you haven't seen before. There's nothing really inspired behind the movie. It's entertaining while it happens, but you'll forget all about it while you're watching the credits. 5/10.

"The Nut Job" Review

Co-produced in South Korea and Canada, this 43 million dollar animated film stars Will Arnett, Katherine Heigl, and Liam Neeson. Based on director Peter Lepeniotis's short, Surly Squirrel (2005), The Nut Job is a heist film about a banished squirrel named Surly (Will Arnett) and his quest to steal nuts from Maury's Nut Store - a front for a crime organization. While the film is technically set in the '50s and toys with some film noir, it never commits to anything and the bank robbery sub-plot just turns into an underdeveloped distraction. Not to say that the rest of the movie is any more focused; there's a coherent screenplay somewhere within The Nut Job, but the film never settles on a direction and ends up just lingering around for an excruciatingly long 85 minutes.

A big problem with The Nut Job is that none of the characters are likable. It's not a character study about flawed people though, it's just a story about a bunch of annoying characters you're supposed to root for. The film has no knowledge of this fact though, and presents the characters as if they were charismatic and dynamic, when they're the exact opposite. The actors involved don't exactly help. Even though the supporting cast is stacked with Brendan Fraser, Maya Rudolph, and Gabriel Iglesias, nobody gives a performance that goes much past apathetic.

The Nut Job might have been more tolerable if there was a single decent joke. Instead, it just gets lazy. The film exaggerates all of the video and audio cues to compensate for its lack of a clever script. None of the physical humor even works. There are times where humor is attempted, but the film is so poorly executed it just comes off as awkward. It's not even entertaining in the "so-bad-that-it's-good" sense, it's just uncomfortable. 

The animation isn't that good. It's stylistic, but in a disorienting sense. There is plenty of detail in the foreground, but everything in the background is completely frozen. The resulting effect completely separates the characters from the environment. It's disconcerting, and this isn't the film for disconcerting. The effort put into the animation is inconsistent, and seems rather amateurish. There are several action sequences, but even those are poorly put together.

I can't really think of any redeeming factors for The Nut Job. Nonetheless, I was considering taking pity on the film, simply because it had some production value and wasn't offensive. I was considering this, until the end credits sequence involving all of the characters dancing along to "Gangnam Style". There's no real reason behind it, other than the fact that PSY is still very popular in South Korea. It seemed like the film was mocking the audience actually, especially given the meaning behind the song. It appeared to me as if it was acknowledging that the entire film was just a money grab. The Nut Job doesn't even try. 1/10.

"Ride Along" Review

Taking the largest January opening weekend box office of all time, this action-comedy, directed by Fantastic Four's Tim Story, stars Kevin Hart and Ice Cube. Hart plays Ben Barber, a gamer/security guard who's just made it into the Police Academy and wants to propose to his girlfriend (Tika Sumpter). However, he has to get the approval of her brother (Ice Cube), James, so that James can take Ben on a "Ride Along" and crazy hijinks can ensue.

Ride Along attempts to establish its tone from the very first car chase - campy and entertaining. However, it doesn't achieve this tone until the 3rd act; the majority of the film ends up being awkward and unfunny. Part of the reason for this is the awful cinematography. A large portion of the shots are poorly lit and uninspired. The film is uncomfortable to look at, and that really sucks out the energy. The editing isn't any better. Between the inappropriate reaction shots, clunky pacing, and serious lack of continuity (most of the film is supposed to take place within one night, yet the sun comes up and goes down several times), the film feels more like a rough cut than a polished final product.

Instead of satirizing cop dramas like Training Day (2001), Ride Along becomes a mediocre version of them. The script is incredibly formulaic, and you can predict every beat far in advance. There are no surprises here. Despite crediting 4 writers, a large proportion of the dialogue is improvised, and these moments feel much more genuine than the clunky scripted dialogue.

It's obvious that Hart is really trying his best in this film, and he really carries it. Ice Cube isn't terrible, but he's more or less going through the motions. The characters don't really play off each other that well until the end. The two extremes - The awkward, fast-talking Hart and the angry, condescending Ice Cube - clash with each other and none of the jokes hit their mark.

Ride Along hit its tone in the last half hour or so, and actually started to be somewhat entertaining. However, the first hour is just excruciatingly awful, and the pay-off just isn't worth it. The sequel bait at the end is far more unsettling than likely intended. 3/10.

"Inside Llewyn Davis" Review

Centered on the life of Llewyn Davis (Oscar Isaac) as he navigates the Greenwich Village folk scene, Inside Llewyn Davis is the most recent film from the Coen Brothers. However, it's not nearly as much of a mainstream film as some of their others.

Inside Llewyn Davis is unsettling, but unsettling in a beautiful way. Davis is far from a typical leading man - one of the things he struggles to try to overcome as a solo artist. He's not very likable. He's not very charismatic. He's not very nice. Davis doesn't overcome any of these problems by the time the film ends, but the goal isn't to make him a dynamic character. Inside Llewyn Davis is a story about a guy who keeps getting beat down, and kind of deserves it. His duo partner committed suicide, and Davis struggles to deal with it. He doesn't have a place to sleep, and has to rely on the kindness of others to survive the winter. He doesn't have a romantic opposite, except for his friend Jean (Carey Mulligan) he accidentally got pregnant. Davis struggles to overcome a plethora of obstacles, to no avail, while everyone around him gets more successful.

Oscar Isaac is absolutely brilliant, bringing humanity to a lost character. Everyone in the ensemble does a fantastic job, from Justin Timberlake to John Goodman to Adam Driver to Stark Sands to F. Murray Abraham. The performances are sincere and set the tone for the movie.

The soundtrack, filled with classic folk tunes, is a joy to listen to. The one original song, "Please Mr. Kennedy", a satire on mainstream music at the time, is absolutely hysterical. The cinematography, shot by Bruno Delbonnel rather than Roger Deakins, the Coen Brother's typical choice (he was busy shooting Skyfall), is shot with a diffused color palette on film, leading to a melancholy feel, fitting the tone perfectly.

Occasionally Inside Llewyn Davis loses its focus, but it always regains its footing quickly. This film certainly isn't for everybody, but I thought it was brilliant. If it sounds like your type of thing, I'd highly recommend it. 9/10.

"Her" Review

Spike Jonze is known for directing off-beat stories, with a resumé including Being John Malkovich (1999), Adaptation (2002), and the Christopher Walken/Fatboy Slim music video to "Weapon of Choice" (Look it up. Trust me, you won't be disappointed.). Her is no exception. The story is about Theodore (Joaquin Phoenix), a lonely card-writer going through a divorce, who ends up buying and falling in love with his Artificially Intelligent Operating System (Voiced by Scarlett Johansson). While the writing credit for Being John Malkovich and Adaptation went to Charlie Kaufman, Her is both written and directed by Spike Jonze.

Her is set at an unspecified date, somewhere in the future, and it feels realistic. That's the film's strongest point; despite being a futuristic story about a guy who falls in love with an OS, it feels real. A ton of effort went into the production design to make it seem futuristic yet attainable. The dialogue feels natural and the story is beyond immersive.

Her never alienates its audience by shoving social commentaries down their throats. At its heart, Her is just a love story. There are social commentaries, but they are subtle and far from the point of the picture. Unlike many futuristic stories, Her doesn't make the assumption that everybody is way too immersed in technology. A decent sized proportion of the extras are shown with new technology, but it's not everybody. When Theodore reveals he's dating his OS, he's met with varying levels of acceptance. And the film makes a point of saying that it's very rare for a person to fall in love with their Operating System.

Joaquin Phoenix anchors the film, often being the only person on screen. Scarlett Johansson is marvelous as Samantha, the OS. Part of Samantha's character is that she's growing all the time, and you can feel that in her performance. Having a character speaking off-screen and on-screen could have turned out disastrous, but Her handles it well, making the conversations between Theodore and Samantha feel like real conversations. Amy Adams plays Amy, Theodore's neighbor and close friend. A lesser movie would have tried to force some romantic interest between the two of them, but Her doesn't. The film just lets them be friends, and the characters are all the stronger for it. There are also some wonderful cameos in the film, including ones by Chris Pratt, Olivia Wilde, and Rooney Mara.

I don't really have any problems with the film. There was the logistical issue over who could hear the OS at times, but for me, that was about it. Her is an absolutely marvelous experience. It's captivating from the first frame to the last. The performances are great, the script is second-to-none, and the score (by Arcade Fire) sets the tone perfectly. 10/10.

"Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones" Review

The original Paranormal Activity (2009) was a surprise hit. Directed by Oren Peli, it was shot for $15,000 and grossed 193 million worldwide, making it the most profitable movie of all time - based on return on investment (not including marketing costs, of course). The film premiered at 2007's Screamfest Horror Film Festival, and was shown at 2008's Slamdance Film Festival. Although it was rejected from Sundance, Paramont acquired the rights and set out to make a remake with Peli directing. However, after a test screening, the studio decided to just release the film with a few minor changes. The limited release was a huge success, and with the help of a viral internet marketing campaign, Paranormal Activity got a wide release, even beating out Saw VI (2009) at the box office. Paranormal Activity actually got relatively good reviews, and even got an Indie Spirit Award nod - for "best first feature." Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones (2014) has nothing to do with that movie. Other than the name, small references, and an impossible tie-in at the end, Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones doesn't have much to do with the rest of the series. The early January horror flick slot is generally a successful one, and producers were likely trying to gain back some momentum lost by Paranormal Activity 4 (2012). However, Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones had to settle for 2nd place at the box office - losing to Frozen (2013).

There's really just not a lot going on in this film. The plot centers around Jesse (The film debut for Andrew Jacobs), a recent high school graduate who becomes possessed after his 18th birthday (Why his 18th birthday? Well, 6 + 6 + 6 = 18. Get it? No? Well shhhhh it makes sense because one of the characters in the film said that was the reason.). After making this discovery, the rest of the film is spent with his friend Hector (Jorge Diaz) screaming "JESSE?" while Jesse does strange things. The Paranormal Activity series has historically had improvised dialogue, and I can't help but feel that Diaz was just handed a camera and told to go for it, but all he could come up with was saying "JESSE!" over and over again; that name is a large portion of this movie's dialogue.

Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones' biggest failure though, is that it's not scary. I guess maybe I'm just not scared by this subgenre, but most off the scares seemed poorly executed, even for what they were. There are a few scenes that feel like they were inspired - including one when they use a Simon™ game as an Ouija Board - but they are few and far between. The ending climatic sequence was more laughable than frightening.

Overall, this movie is just a waste of time. You've seen it done before, and you've seen it done better. It's not gonna be the worst movie of this year, probably not even of this month, but you don't need to see it. 3/10.