"Godzilla" Review

The sophomore feature film from Gareth Edwards, this is the first American-made Godzilla film since Roland Emmerich's in 1998. Although Godzilla himself isn’t introduced until late in the picture, the movie wastes no time in developing his backstory by having an opening sequence filled with photographs of the military attempting to kill him with nuclear weapons in 1954. Godzilla then spends a significant amount of time developing MUTOs, malevolent creatures that serve as the primary antagonist.

Unfortunately, most of the characters in Godzilla aren’t given a whole lot to do other than stare in awe or give meaningless military speeches in an Asylum-esche setting. There is a notable exception in Bryan Cranston however. Although his character isn’t more than a supporting role, he provides the most effective human element to the story. Elizabeth Olson is also incredibly charismatic and it’s clear she’s trying, but she just isn’t given too much to do. Even the titular monster is so poorly developed you don’t really care what happens to him.

With a 160 billion dollar budget, the special effects are incredibly complex and well done. Had the computer graphics been designed on a singular computer, it would have taken 450 years to render. That said, a large amount of the effects take place at night, so you aren’t able to see them in their full glory. Godzilla’s roar is absolutely astounding. It’s possibly the most impressive part of his design.

The film, veering away from the monster’s campy history, takes itself strangely seriously. It’s as if this was an actual event that took place and the filmmakers were trying to give it as much respect as possible, which could have worked, but with a script involving giant monsters fighting and an abundance of pseudo-science, it just doesn’t.

The score, by Alexandre Desplat, uses themes from 2001: A Space Odyssey, and is surprisingly effective. It’s subtle and drives forward the tone of the film.

While Godzilla at times seems like a big-budget Asylum film, it still does a lot right. For what it is, it’s pleasantly enjoyable. If your expectations aren’t too high, you shouldn’t be disappointed. 6/10.

"Neighbors" Review

Despite the tagline “From the guys who brought you This is the End”, Neighbors is directed by Forgetting Sarah Marshall’s Nicholas Stoller. However, Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg are producers on the film (And Rogen stars). The film revolves around two young parents (Rogen and Rose Byrne) who have a fraternity move in next door (led by Zac Efron and Dave Franco) to them. Right from the get-go, you’re forced to suspend a significant amount of disbelief, and there are plenty of sequences throughout the film that are far too outrageous to be realistic, but yet the film is able to create its own separate reality to engross you in the story.

In the style of mumblecore and Team Apatow, the script is highly improvised. That’s not to say that there’s not a strong direction the script takes though. The film is incredibly well-cut and the gags don’t last too long. There are moments where the film slows down or repeats itself, but those moments are few and far between. 

The humor itself is raunchy, as to be expected from an R-rated fraternity film, but unlike This is the End, the goal isn’t really to push limits. It’s admittedly juvenile, but it never really feels like it gets too immature. Although not all of the jokes work, there is a nice theme about growing up present throughout that makes the film feel like it has a deeper meaning.

Neighbors is also self-aware about the character troupes it’s creating and the ones it’s avoiding. A lesser film would have made Seth Rogen a Kevin James-esche man-child and wouldn’t have given Rose Byrne much to do, but as mentioned in the film, both of the characters are incredibly irresponsible and have a little “Kevin James” in them. All of the fraternity stereotypes are present and parodied, although some of them are used more effectively than others.

By all means this is not a perfect movie. But it’s beautifully shot (by one of my favorite cinematographers, Brandon Trost), wildly funny, and incredibly entertaining. Neighbors effectively creates a movie about growing up while still being able to make fun of fraternity-style films. It’s definitely one of the best studio films I’ve seen from this year. 8/10. 

"The Amazing Spider-Man 2" Review

The sequel to the 2012 reboot, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 returns Marc Webb in the director's chair and Andrew Garfield as the web-slinging superhero. In this installment of the franchise, Peter Parker fights with three undeveloped super-villains, tries to discover the truth behind his father's death, and deals with some excruciatingly painful relationship drama with Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone). The tagline to the film is "His Greatest Battle Begins", but you're left wondering if the movie is just a teaser for the sequel, because there's not much in this film that screams "great". It's not fun. It's not campy. It's just hard to sit through.

In a superhero movie, it's important to have memorable villains, and what The Amazing Spider-Man 2 lacks in quality, it makes up in quantity. Paul Giamatti plays The Rhino, Jamie Foxx plays Electro, and Dane DeHaan plays The Green Goblin. While it looks like all three actors were trying their best and having fun, the villains lacked realistic enough motivation to carry any weight. Despite promises from the trailers, The Rhino is barely present in the film. Everything about The Green Goblin's development is rushed and haphazard. And Electro's backstory is created almost entirely off of clichés, while the film seems to have no self-awareness of this fact. 

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 substitutes actual emotion for blatant manipulation. There is a young child who is inspired by Spider-Man and subsequently does stupidly brave things. In slo-mo action sequences, random citizens are singled out that Spider-Man saves. And a supporting character dies (in an incredibly stupid fashion) that Spider-Man ALMOST saved. It's all incredibly forced, and it all just seems lazy.

By the time I reached the third act of this 142 minute chore, I was just looking to be done with the movie, and could excuse the rushed villain exits. However, one thing that stuck with me was the lack of conclusion to the subplot involving Peter's parents. The opening sequence of the film shows their death, and Peter spends a good chunk of the movie trying to figure out what happens to them, but after an anti-climatic sequence where Peter finds out the truth, nothing is done with it. Despite the time spent, it holds almost no weight in the film. It's as if the writers decided that they needed to talk about his parents more, but couldn't figure out how it fit in with the rest of the story.

Overall, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 feels like a filler movie. It's especially disappointing because the first film in the franchise felt like a filler movie as well. Walking out of the film, I didn't feel anything but apathy. I felt like I watched a 2+ hour trailer, rather than an actual film. To add insult to injury, the after-credits scene to the film isn't even Spider-Man related. It's a teaser-trailer for X-Men: Days of Future Past. I feel like that simple fact sums up the quality of this film pretty well. 3/10.