Search Your Feelings...My Star Wars Destiny.

I've had a numerous amount of hobbies and interests over the course of my life, but none of them came completely naturally. Raiders of the Lost Ark is my favorite movie of all time, yet it wasn't until 2006 I discovered it after seeing the stunt spectacular in Walt Disney World. I started wearing a red vest and jean jacket after the first time I saw Back to the Future Part II on RTE ONE in Ireland on vacation. I was 14. Just recently I've become an avid fan of the WWE at the age of 23, the first live event of which I attend in 2 weeks at Madison Square Garden.

My point is that almost everything in my life that i've been a fan of has been something I discovered or was introduced to. All except for three things. Three things that i've been a fan of since I was born (or at least so long that it's pointless to try and remember when I first saw them.) 

1. Spider-Man
2. Thomas the Tank Engine
3. Star Wars

The Spider-Man side of me has been placated by numerous films since 2002. The Thomas the Tank Engine side isn't something I've embraced since Thomas and the Magic Railroad in 2000 seeing as though I've grown out of the target demographic (though I still have my train collection in the attic and I'll be damned if I ever give it up.)

But let's not talk about Thomas or Spidey. They don't have the biggest movie of all time coming out on Thursday night. Let's talk about Star Wars. 

I mentioned that it was pointless to try and put a number on it, but for the sake of argument lets try. The special editions of the original trilogy were first released in 1997 when I was 4 years old. It was a little before then. I still own the original tapes which I first viewed the series on. They're a little worn out, and I mainly utilize the DVDs and Blu-Rays nowadays, but they still work. Sometimes nothing compares to the excitement of putting the tape in a rewinder and waiting to hear it pop out, knowing that it's time to start the show. 

I don't know exactly why I fell in love with the series, it just happened. I have vivid memories of going into all the stores, all the Kmarts and Caldors, and being in awe of all the toys. It was always a feeling of unreplacable joy when I would leave with a new action figure or playset to show off to my friends.

Out of all them, i think my favorite was either the 12 inch C3PO or the TIE Advanced Fighter with Darth Vader action figure. That year, I went as the Sith Lord for Halloween, albeit with a flashlight instead of a lightsaber. I didn't want to break my lightsaber because it was reserved for exhibition battles on my back deck with my brother Kevin. He had the green Luke Skywalker version, and I the red Darth Vader. I don't remember who exactly won the most, but that's beside the point. 

So what is my point? It's that I can prattle on all day about how much of my childhood involved Star Wars until The Force Awakens is on iTunes, but I can do the same for my adulthood. There's no age recommendation for Star Wars. It's for everyone. You can watch it when you're an impressionable 4 year old boy, you can watch it when you're a 23 year old soon to be college graduate with movie critic aspirations, you can watch in the retirement home at the age of 80 on what I can only assume will be hologram projection. 

It holds up. It never gets old. It's a classic story of embracing a destiny, confronting your past, and forging the future. Everyone has their favorite character. Mine happens to be a scruffy looking nerf herder who made the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs. And also the protocol droid who is an ace at human cyborg relations.

I don't mention the prequels much, because like most I recognize the fault in most of them. At least now I do. I will painfully admit that I happened to be fond of Jar Jar Binks at the time of The Phantom Menace's release. I even had the collectible cup from Pizza Hut. Now I can see him as the toy hocking, annoying gimmick that he really is, but it was invisible to me at the age of 6. 

That goes back to further my point. Star Wars reaches a wide range. Even if it seems a bit painful. The childlike goofiness of a character such as Jar Jar in a film that also involves senate meetings about Trade Federations goes to show that Star Wars looks to include everyone. Neither aspect of either one is what anyone looks for in a Star Wars movie, and it creates for a bit of a snooze. But again, no one is excluded from Star Wars. It's for everyone. 

From the first time I finished Return of the Jedi, there's one question I've always asked. What happens next? As big of a Star Wars fan as I was, I never really got into the comics or the novels. Not for any particular reason other than I never really sought them out as a child, and as an adult I knew that reading just wouldn't be the same as seeing it unfold on the screen the way the series originally did for me. 

When the Wikipedia age came about and I would mindlessly browse, I learned that George Lucas had in fact planned on continuing the story, but eventually decided against it. I occasionally looked for updates, yet I hadn't held much hope. 

Then came that fateful day. October 30th, 2012. 19 years old. I was with my mom and dad heading into a T.G.I. Friday's in Albany to meet up with Kevin who was attending UAlbany. I had refreshed my Facebook and there it was. "Disney buys Lucasfilm. Episode VII in Planning Stages."  I stopped in my tracks. I couldn't believe it. My mind started to race. What could it mean? Are Luke, Leia and Han back? Would Lucas be involved?

Here we are. 23 years old. 4 days from seeing the movie I've wanted more than any other movie in my entire life. And sure, we know a lot more about it then we did on that 2012 day, but how much do we really know? That's a both a testament to JJ Abrams bank vault secrecy policies, and the fact I've deliberately avoided spoilers in a way I never have before. I don't want to know what happens until i'm sitting in the Poughkeepsie Galleria with my best friends watching the opening crawl and hearing that goose bumping opening John Williams theme. 

Because I feel like that 4 year old boy again.

"Steve Jobs" Review

As a matter of personal taste, I have not seen the 2013 film Jobs starring Ashton Kutcher. Because I do not care for Ashton Kutcher. Therefore, I went into this film with a blank slate of what to expect of the Steve Jobs story. And all the better for it. 

The film catches up with Mr Jobs during the launch of three separate products and their respective press events. But what we really see is the behind the scenes tension that goes into each event. 

The narrative structure of this film is absolutely brilliant. Aaron Sorkin has crafted a magnificent script. Much like a three act play. As opposed to a cut and dried biopic, this film focuses on three events of his career and the emotions that surround them. So rather than a plot based narrative, we have a character based narrative. It's ingeniously clever to spotlight who these characters are as people instead of what happens to them. 

The script is remarkably clever. It doesn't kneel at the altar of Steve Jobs. It sheds light on the fact that this was a deeply flawed human being, surrounded by deeply flawed human beings. I can't attest to whether or not the film is accurate to actual events, but I can attest to that it's at least truthful with what it's conveying. There's manipulation and deceit, and whether you choose to believe it's real, it's real enough for the film. 

The cinematography as well is used as tool. You'll notice that the scenes in 1984 have a grainer look than the scenes in 1999. It's an aesthetic choice to use different camera lenses as a reflection of the time periods. It's a small decision, but appreciated by those who can tell the difference. 

And the broader structure of the film allows for so many strong performances to take shape.  

Michael Fassbender creates a Steve Jobs unencumbered by expectations. It's a character unto it's own with his motivations and traits. It's hard to root for him or against him at any given time. There is no sinister intentions, but the Steve Jobs that Michael Fassbender is more human than what the generations of loyal Apple users hype him to be with flaws and ulterior motives. This is truly a transformative performance, the likes of which Fassbender hasn't done before. 

There is nothing wrong with Kate Winslet's performance. She's immersed herself. But something that took me out was the wild unevenness of her Polish accent. It's non-existent in the first sequence, emerges in the second, and comes and goes as she pleases. It's really distracting. 

The performance that stands out the most to me, especially considering the amount of screen time he gets, is that of Seth Rogen as Steve Wozniak. This is not a Seth Rogen anyone has seen before, but it's the Seth Rogen I always knew he could be. It's a wrenching, heartbroken performance, one that shows a man betrayed for no reason other than personal gain. When Rogen's Wozniak lets loose his frustrations, he is a man who is completely justified for doing so. It's so honest and raw. And for years, i've wanted to see Judd Apatow's stoner-in-residence show us he was capable of doing this kind of acting. And he finally has. 

Steve Jobs is a near perfect movie. One that doesn't conform to what is expected of a biopic, and one that you anguish for having to ever end. I thoroughly recommend it. 

A

"Straight Outta Compton" Review

The world's most dangerous group makes for the summers most interesting story. Just after the worst film of the year came out to give me something to critically eviscerate, Ice Cube and Dr Dre have told their story in the most engaging and emotional film of the year, and showed the power that a movie can have when the story is told with a thorough narrative. 

In the late 1980's, Dr Dre, Ice Cube, Eazy-E, MC Ren, Arabian Prince and DJ Yella came together to give a voice to the people of Compton, combining brutally honest lyrics with strongly produced tracks. Straight Outta Compton chronicles their rise to fame as they contend with opposition such as law enforcement, protest groups, and their own vanity. 

The portrait painted of these mens lives is full of depth and heart. We first find them in an environment where they are judged by their appearance and struggle to make ends meet. The hard truth makes for compelling storytelling as they create their own way out. The tight bond between the members of the group and the truthfulness with it's portrayal makes it all the more heartbreaking when egos get in the way. There are devastating moments, points of pride, and everything in between, and the gripping power of the cast really sell this film. It never lets you go. 

Corey Hawkins plays Dr. Dre with a sense of self discovery that allows him to convincingly journey from the young dreamer with a turntable into the millionaire entrepreneur that we all know today. He strongly encapsulates the most grounded member of the group and takes him to his lows and highs which allows for a raw performance. 

Jason Mitchell as Eazy-E has the big personality and the tension that powers the story. He is not one to admit fault, and it creates a rift through the group. He also goes through a full transformation in which we see his full emotional spectrum. 

I was worried about the casting of O'Shea Jackson, Jr as his father Ice Cube. I've seen nepotism in casting before, and it was just plain After Earth awful. But after seeing this movie, i'm convinced that no one else could possibly have done this part justice. He has the attitude we've come to know, and the spirit of the lyrical poet that won't censor himself. He's nailed it. And I would love to see him work with his father in the future. 

Straight Outta Compton is the 2nd best film of the year. (After Mad Max: Fury Road). It's powerful, strongly acted, incredibly shot, and tells a heartfelt story. Check it out. 

A

"Fantastic Four" Review

No one ever wants a movie to fail. I've always wanted a great Fantastic Four movie. There had been 2...well, technically 3 attempts to make a movie based on the character (If you count the Roger Corman unreleased movie). Yet, there was a small part of me that was hoping that this movie would be garbage. Only so that the movie rights could go back to Marvel Studios. There's no guarantee that would happen if the movie tanks, but it's obviously more likely than if it succeeded. So if this movie had been good, i'd have been pleased but somewhat disappointed. In reality, this movie was more of a travesty than i could have possibly imagined. And I couldn't be happier. 

I'm not even going to bother with a plot synopsis. Let's get right to it. 

The film does not contain any semblance of energy or fun. The tone is so downtrodden and monotonous that you'll swear that no one was awake during production of the film. It's tedious, boring and it just makes you sigh loudly within the first half hour. They have great actors in the film, but none of them are putting in any kind of effort with the notable exception of Michael B. Jordan who is at least trying to bring some excitement to his role. It feels like poor direction was given to the cast. 

The story does not inspire any sort of confidence, being full of old, trodden cliches and predictable dialogue. It's watered down, uninspired, straight up boring. No logical development of the characters, no strong villain, nothing. I've only left a theater once in my life (The Last Airbender) but I was packing up to leave before Michael B. Jordan came onscreen. Quite literally. I grabbed my soda and popcorn and was about to ask my friend if he wanted to leave and go see something better. 

What makes it even worse is that there are things that could be interesting or fun, but they've been omitted! And the real crime is that they hint at them! It's frustrating! They leave out what could have been the best part of the movie! You'll hear this from a lot of people, but that's because it's true: The film is missing about half an hour. Considering how slow the film starts pacing wise, it doesn't feel possible that it could be longer, but that's symbolic of the worst pacing problem in a movie i've ever seen. It's frustrating. 

As you may know by now, the film had some production problems with the director and the studio. I don't know what exactly happened behind the scenes, but it's clear that this movie was not any one person's fault. It does not feel like anyone was in control, and a lot of elements were thrown in that just do not go together. The film is one large mess and it's apparent that no one wanted to clean it up. It was made to meet a deadline. Which it did. But like the student who is rushing to turn in his exam when he's struggling with the multiple choice, it didn't answer the essay questions. 

It's awful. And i'm hopeful that it might help get the rights to the characters to Kevin Feige who will give them the movie that they deserve.

F

"Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation" ADVANCED Review

Yesterday, thanks to my good friend Spencer Cohen, I had the enormous honor of attending the Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation red carpet premiere in New York City. It was a surreal experience lining up in the middle of Times Square, receiving free movie memorabilia such as shirts, sunglasses, hats and a poster. I actually had the opportunity to talk to Jeremy Renner and JJ Abrams very briefly and get autographs from Christopher McQuarrie and Abrams. After the red carpet event where we were able to get up close with the cast of the movie, we were sent to the AMC Empire on 42nd street where we were all treated to popcorn, soda, and a free screening of the film in IMAX. This was a magnificent and memorable experience which I will not soon forget. And thankfully, that applies to the movie too.

Picking up a few years after the events of the last film in the franchise, we find Ethan Hunt and the IMF team going up against the mysterious Syndicate. They must also contend with the opposition they are receiving from the CIA. With few resources, and not many they trust, Ethan and his team must take on forces which they do not fully understand. 

What I love most about the Mission Impossible series is that it doesn't oversaturate itself. There is only a movie released every 4 to 5 years, and when the films do come out, they aren't hastily assembled. They're well written, magnificently choreographed, relevant to the technology and fears that surround society at the time. They're all great films, and they don't come around often enough for you to grow tired of them. 

Rogue Nation is a classic spy versus its own resources tale where the protagonist must contend with multiple forces attempting to bring it down, and it thrusts our cast into a whirlwind adventure where the edge of the seat is the only place you want to find yourself. The story never lets you drift away. There are moments when you are positive you know it will happen one way, and soon a wrench is thrown in to the mix. You never know where it's headed, and all for the better. 

The stunt work in this film is absolutely incredible. The imaginative crafting of such unbelievable fights and feats is only made much more enthralling by the knowledge that they were accomplished in real life with out the aid of CGI. When you see Tom Cruise holding on to the side of an airplane as it takes off, you will feel as though you are on it with him, because it's so authentically majestic. 

Cruise gives yet another focused and stellar turn as our hero Ethan Hunt. What makes this role so uniquely his is how his character has aura about him in which all and nothing are revealed at the same time. You don't know whether he is crazy or brilliant, and that speaks to the duplicity with which Cruise sets off on his course. 

While it's obviously Cruise's film, it would be nothing without it's magnificent supporting cast. Simon Pegg's charming comic relief mixed with his never ending loyalty make him a joy to see brought to life. Jeremy Renner's cavalier attitude which makes him integral to the Avengers carries over to this film. Ving Rhames doesn't have a large part, but he also plays an essential role. Alec Baldwin is a new addition, believable in his quasi-antagonism but devoted to his intentions. And finally, Rebecca Ferguson is a new face, but one which I hope to see more of as she is an enigma unto herself. You never know where she lies. And that's all part of the fun. 

See this movie. See it in IMAX for the plane scene alone. But see it. It's classic action filmmaking and it's a never ending dose of adrenaline. 

A

"Yeah, I'm thinking I'm Back"

Yes, it's been a while. As some of you may know, I'm currently interning with a creative media outlet alongside working my two regular jobs and (if you can believe it) spending a good deal of time in the gym. Suffice to say, I've been pretty tied up with things and unable to write many reviews, let alone tape an episode of Flick Check. But growing up is about balancing life, and now I believe I am in a place where I can throw reviewing back into the mix. So as much as I can, I will be posting written reviews again. However, for the time being, Flick Check is on hiatus. I promise it will be back in the next month with new episodes, but for the time being, this is the place to look for my movie reviews. In any case.....

In order to kick off my return, let's start with six brief reviews of what I've seen since my last review in May. 

I've never really cared much for Melissa McCarthy. She's never seemed deep to me. But then I saw Spy and discovered a level of emotion in her I didn't know about. It's a roaringly hilarious secret agent film which plays amongst the tropes (even if some seem Austin Powers-y) but also discovers heart in the main protagonist. McCarthy is ready for stronger roles, and the fact that she was able to make me feel something in the middle of what I assumed would be just another blockbuster has made me see her in a whole new light. But the real joy of this film and the biggest surprise in years is Jason Statham. Like McCarthy, he's only ever seemed to be one person. Just your average tough British man who uses his fists as weapons and talks a big game. Never in the summers that i've watched him beat the crap out of random henchmen could I have ever imagined that the man was actually funny! Sure he's just playing a parody of his normal characters, but he does it so brilliantly. The absolute absurdity and timing of his comedy works to his advantage. His back and forth with McCarthy sold this film. I sincerely hope that this does for him what 21 Jump Street did for Channing Tatum. 

A-

In the new season of Trailer Park Boys, the writers decided to shake things up by adding a new twist: Sunnyvale is now a retirement community. Why bring that up? Because it kept the show from growing stale. The only way that a new Jurassic Park film could have worked was if they did something different. They did: this time the park is open. While the dinos done wild is still here, it's fresher. In many ways, Jurassic World works. Chris Pratt's trademark charm is undeniably a pro. His animal trainer carries the film while showing that he can play the role straighter than he usually has while also letting him be quirky. And the nostalgia that the film has for the original is certainly appealing to the mass audience, if not a little cheating. Yet where it falters is the children. The young protagonists are just not convincing and feel out of place. The kids in the first movie didn't feel like they were shoehorned, but this time they feel like they were added to try and replicate a formula. Their plot is just way too unfocused. Also, Ty Simpkins still seems very hollow as an actor. I know he's young, and hopefully he'll get more of a range, but he doesn't seem any better than he did in Iron Man 3. But it's still a fun movie, and the 2nd best in the series.

B+

Dope is one of those films that look great in the trailers, yet you go into the theater not knowing what it's really about. When it's over, you realize it's not going to be one of your favorite movies, but damn was it good. The raw, tense story of growing up in Inglewood, CA where the schools have metal detectors and the drug dealers run amok. It's a brutally real story of Malcolm whose only wish is to have a normal life and make it into Harvard while staying out of trouble. Life has other plans for him. The brilliance of this film is that it's comprised of a relatively unknown cast with the exception of Blake Anderson of Workaholics. What this does is make you feel the story through a unique perspective without a preconceived notion of who the characters are. Shameik Moore gives a wonderfully troubled performance which showcases how much of a change he grows through and how real it feels. He just wants to be a kid, but life won't let him. The film gets a little heavy handed with it's message in the third act, but it's a brilliant story.

A-

It's been two years since the last Pixar movie, and five since the last great one. Inside Out is a real return to form for the company. It's a touching story inside the head of a young girl named Riley navigating life in a new city, and putting her emotions on display as they guide her. The story of Riley herself is nothing particularly new, but her emotions and their adventures make it all worth the journey. It's a unique perspective on what would be an otherwise mundane tale, and the way it's told will grab your heart and not let go. It's profound, funny, sweet, and endearing all at once. The cast bring warmth and perspective into these characters and it absolutely pops. I'll admit, by the end, I was crying. And I say that proudly. 

A

Ted 2 is pretty much what you would expect. It's hilarious if you enjoy Seth McFarlane's sense of humor, and appallingly offensive if you don't. But what it boils down to is more of the same. It's always fun to see Mark Wahlberg play it loosely, and he manages some great one liners, but it's not enough to save Ted 2 from being a retread. There are funny cameos, one in particular that will never get old, but I wouldn't advise you seeing Ted 2 on that basis. It's funny, just not ticket price funny. 

C+

If a movie is awful but I still like it, odds are it has Arnold Schwarzenegger in it. He's always been my kryptonite. Most likely due to the fact that I grew up on his films. When he left office as Governor, I was all too thrilled to have him acting again. When I heard he was returning to the fading Terminator franchise, I looked forward to having the spark back after Christian Bale extinguished it. But Terminator: Genisys takes a franchise already known for it's confusing paradoxes and flimsy continuity and smacks it with a sledgehammer. It's a long, twisted mess of a movie that features way too much going on and can't keep itself in check. It's certainly more interesting than the last two films, but that doesn't say much at all. Emilia Clarke does her best, but she can't replace Linda Hamilton. Jason Clarke is satisfactory, but the movie feels beneath him. And try as they might, Hollywood just can't seem to figure out what to do with Jai Courtney. Whereas Arnold Schwarzenegger is usually just an excuse to see a bad movie, in this one, he's the only thing saving it. The same mono-tonal, yet heartfelt work that he did in T2 is here. He's as alive as a cyborg can be. He doesn't need the movie to focus on him, yet he steals the show with his committed and purposefully dry performance. He always said he would be back, and for the first time since leaving office, he truly is. 

C-

"San Andreas" Review

First look at San Andreas will make you think that it's just explosions, carnage, and another step in a man's conversion from The Rock to Dwayne Johnson. For the most part, you're right. The film mainly revolves around the destruction surrounding an earthquake, but don't look at The Rock as the gimmick he was in his Disney days. He has become a full fledged movie star and a great actor with strong performances.

Johnson stars as Ray Gaines, an LA Fire Rescue Pilot. When the San Andreas fault begins shifting, earthquakes spread all across the west coast, and Gaines teams up with his estranged wife to rescue his daughter in San Francisco.

In terms of plot, don't look too far. It's a bare basics action disaster movie, and despite it's best efforts to instill itself with depth, it doesn't crack any new eggs. But I didn't hate it. The simplistic nature of the plot immediately calls to mind the wave of action films from the 80's and 90's. The scientists, the estranged wife, the daughter, elements that make the film seem as though it was written for a Stallone or a Willis. There's nothing noteworthy here, but it's still an enjoyable experience simply for the way it feels. If you're a fan of action, you'll be happy.

What saves this from being nothing more than a mindless, generic destruction piece like Transformers is The Rock...err...Dwayne Johnson. Johnson has a magnificent presence in the film, giving off the aura one would find in a classic action star. He very well may be the next Schwarzenegger. He has a likability that was missing from some of his earlier films such as Get Smart or The Game Plan where he seemed to be cast based on his stature. Now, Johnson is giving top notch performances full of heart, charisma, depth. He is truly a drawing factor now. And one that's not wasting your time.

All in all, theres not much to San Andreas other than being a fun action film and a showcase for what it's lead actor has become. It's not a great film. But it's enjoyable. He's known as The Rock. He's known as Dwayne Johnson. But to me...he'll always be...Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.

B-

"Mad Max: Fury Road" Review

I won't bother lying. I've not seen the original Mad Max trilogy. I just never got around to it. (Quite honestly, I'm not a huge Mel Gibson fan.) I went into Mad Max: Fury Road knowing only that it had Tom Hardy, Charlize Theron and a post apocalyptic setting. Pretty much mentally blind to what I should expect. The one thing I hadn't considered is that it would reinvigorate my love of cinema in a time when I was growing weary of the blockbuster culture.

In a post apocalyptic earth in which water and gasoline are commodities, cult leader Immortan Joe reigns supreme. When Imperator Furiosa rebels to free Joe's enslaved wives, a chase begins on the Fury Road. Caught in the middle is Max, a man haunted by his past, and who wants nothing more than to survive and be left alone.

The story doesn't shove exposition down your throat, instead opting to thrust you into this world at full speed and taking you along for the ride. It trusts the fact that you will pick it up along the way. It doesn't need to be all about Max for it to show him off. It's about women taking control of their lives, and the way in which it packs that punch is extremely effective. It's a thrilling narrative with spectacle and message, and it gets everything across without belittling the audience.

Mad Max: Fury Road packs as much art and story into a blockbuster as you possibly can. It's a large scale spectacle full of beautifully executed stunts that defy what was once thought possible. The film is essentially a 2 hour car chase, but easily one of the greatest of all time. The design of the film is remarkable too. Whereas most films set after the fall of civilization opt for the pale, beige, dust aesthetic, Mad Max has a fully immersive color palette which shifts depending on the stakes of the scene. 80% of the film is done with practical effects, and the end result is a gritty, graspable, realism. (Or as much as you can pack into a film with mutant cult members after the end of the world). Honestly, this movie is insane in the best possible fashion.

In a time in which when the lack of equality in Hollywood is as obvious as ever, Mad Max: Fury Road packs a wholloping punch for feminism in action movies. Despite Max being the title character, it's really Furiosa's story. Furiousa is a strong, capable woman who can kick an ass, drive a war rig, fire a gun, and own it. The other women in the story are not behind either, taking the offensive and showing that there really is no reason why women can't drive an action movie aside Michael Bay putting Megan Fox in short shorts and a tube top. (THE IRONY BEHIND THAT CLAIM: Rosie Huntington-Whiteley who was god awful in Transformers: Dark of the Moon, is outstanding in her role here.) And the best part is that giving the female characters strong roles and developed personalities outside of sexualization is that it does nothing to lessen the power of Max himself. He is just as strong of a character.

Tom Hardy seems to love wearing a mask (in this case a cage) and putting on a voice, but it's something that he does so very well. He does have the arc of the loner who changes their mind, but it's done with that limited speaking and physicality that only Tom Hardy can seem to pull off. There's a meat to his role. He's the lead, but he's comfortable not being the center of attention. He's mad, but not out of his element.

Charlize Theron still ranks as my favorite actress currently working in the business. Her commitment to the role is what truly steals the show. She takes control of a situation, leads the charge, and gives depth to Furiosa. It's a brilliant counter to Tom Hardy, and just as badass.

Mad Max: Fury Road is strong, fast, beautiful, artful, and alive. It's insane. It's fun. It's powerful. It leads the charge for gender equality. It's 2015's best movie to date and worth your time.

A

"Avengers: Age of Ultron" Review

Note: Whilst it is my policy to not leak spoilers in a review for a movie, I must include some from Iron Man 3, Thor: The Dark World, and Captain America: The Winter Soldier in order to properly explain context and reactions to this film. But rest assured, there will be no spoilers from Avengers: Age of Ultron.

My affinity for The Avengers is about as much of a secret as Barry Bonds' steroid usage. The first movie was a huge leap forward in the world of Superhero films. It was an unprecedented move for movies to have such a connected and cohesive universe. The way that Kevin Feige and Joss Whedon brought together all of Marvel's heavy hitters into one film and gave them such a beautiful interplay was groundbreaking. Thusly, my expectations for Avengers: Age of Ultron could likely be found on the top of the Empire State Building. So did the sequel reach 102 stories?

Set after the events of Marvel's Phase 2 films, the Avengers are once again teamed up to retrieve Loki's scepter from the hands of Hydra. But Tony Stark and Bruce Banner have come up with another  plan in order to prevent the events of the first film from ever coming to pass again. An artificial intelligence named Ultron. But (as so often happens) Ultron isn't too keen on being a puppet and turns on the team. Now the Avengers must save the world from the threat they themselves caused whilst also dealing with two new enhanced humans: Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver. 

In the films that followed The Avengers, we found our heroes in various situations in which we wondered why they couldn't just call the others for help. I think that is most likely the largest failing of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Where was Captain America when Tony Stark's house was being blown into the water and the President was kidnapped? Where was Iron Man when Dark Elves came to London to cause havoc for Thor? Where was EVERYONE ELSE when S.H.I.E.L.D. was taken down by the infiltration of Hydra? Where were Hulk and Hawkeye period? While the first batch of films worked on teasing The Avengers, the second batch has left them without one another or an explantion as to where they are. It wasn't a major issue when they were setting up the heroes in their origins, but in a post Avengers world where they all know about one another, it raises more than a few eyebrows. And Avengers: Age of Ultron makes little to no account for any of these questions.  My biggest issue is that at the end of Iron Man 3, Tony Stark blew up all of his suits, took the shrapnel out of his chest, and said that he didn't need any of the technology to be Iron Man. Yet in the very opening of this film, he's in a suit again being a hero. No explanation of what happened or why he changed his mind. What the hell?

The parts involving Nick Fury feel rather extraneous to the story itself, and doesn't seem to accomplish much else besides giving Samuel L. Jackson an opportunity to knock a film off of his Marvel contract. Whereas he seemed to move the story forward in Captain America: The Winter Soldier, his part in this film carries about as much weight as it did in Iron Man 2. Just a pep talk and a reminder that he is still in the world. 

(Most issues in the film have to do with specific items and are quite spoilery, so I won't go into them here. I will do something separate on the show with multiple warnings.)

Despite minor failings in making the universe seamless, Avengers: Age of Ultron is a strong piece if not as good as the first film. The story arches a global scale, and certainly has a sense of impending doom. But it still feels a little smaller, more organized and much more intimate than it did the first time around. We really get a stronger understanding of who these characters are. 

 The development of Ultron as a villain is a far cry from the evil A.I.'s of the past where all it took was a calm voice telling you "I'm afraid I can't let you do that." James Spader's soothing magical machinations create a robot full of life and schemes that you don't mind the monologuing. It isn't a cartoon, it's a vibrant force of evil which mistakes it's own intentions as well. 

The normal players all function in a manner similar to the way they have in the past with a few notes. Robert Downey Jr. made more of an effort to show Tony Stark's humanity in Iron Man 3, even if the PTSD from the first Avengers movie made him seem a little less free-spirited. That same feeling returns in this film but mixed with the Tony Stark we have all come to know and love, and the way that it comes across makes it more believable that he would take the position he does in the future...

It's hard for me to really pick a standout because there were 2. Jeremy Renner and Paul Bettany. Renner's Hawkeye gets an opportunity to really shine and prove that he deserves to be here. And Paul Bettany brings something delicate yet strong into play that the film really needed.

Avengers: Age of Ultron succeeds as a film in it's own right, but never reaches the standards the first film set. That being said, i'm still enormously excited to see what comes in it's wake. I recommend taking the family at the end of this sentence.

B

Andrew's 2015 Oscar Predictions

Here we are. The Academy Awards are tomorrow night, and that can only mean it's time for my annual predictions. As has been the tradition, I will not be releasing my predictions for every single category, just the major ones. If you want to know my thoughts on one not listed here, feel free to reach out to me. 

Best Visual Effects: None of the nominees are undeserving. However, the sheer magnitude of work creating the simians for Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, and the snubbing (yet again) of Andy Serkis, all but guarantee that the apes will swing away with the trophy. 

Best Adapted Screenplay: Whiplash and The Imitation Game both have an equal claim to the trophy. I was slightly more enthralled by Whiplash, but I think that the story of Alan Turing in The Imitation Game is too strong not to commend. Considering this is it's best chance for a trophy, The Imitation Game will take it. 

Best Original Screenplay: Boyhood was clever, but it didn't have that much of a hook for me besides it's gimmicky production. I personally loved Birdman and it's personal journey. It's a tossup between The Grand Budapest Hotel and Birdman, but I give Birdman a boost for it's creativity.

Best Original Song: This is really the only chance to redeem themselves for the snub, so you can expect "Everything" to be "Awesome" about The Lego Movie's main theme. 

Best Animated Feature: No one really thought this would be a race until the obvious winner wasn't nominated. It's anyone's guess, but gun to my head.......Big Hero 6.

Best Cinematography: Birdman. No competition required. The magnificent attention to detail and sheer patience to achieve the film's iconic "one shot" style make it the most deserving. 

Best Director: Again. Birdman. Alejandro González Iñárritu and his vision and attention make him the on to beat. Richard Linklater and his work on Boyhood make him a close second, but I wouldn't wager on an upset. 

Best Supporting Actress: I dislike how decidely monochromatic the nominees are in the acting categories are this year, as I had enjoyed Carmen Ejogo's work in Selma more than the current crop. But given the choices, it will more than likely go to Patricia Arquette for Boyhood. Mainly due to her independence as soon as she breaks free from the losers she unfortunately paired with. 

Best Supporting Actor: This is Andrew's 100% Guarantee for 2015. This will go to J.K. Simmons for Whiplash. Just for the broad range of assertion, aggression, dominance, tranquility and warmth. He's amongst good company, but none of them are holding a candle. 

Best Actress: Not what I expected. I was thinking this would be going to Amy Adams for Big Eyes, but the Academy has not followed any expectations this year. Rosamund Pike stole the show in Gone Girl, and she is my preferred winner amongst the nominees, but the academy seems to be leaning in the direction of Julianne Moore for Still Alice and I can live with that. Moore will win. 

Best Actor: This is the race to focus on. As it's really come down to two. It's going to be Michael Keaton vs Eddie Redmayne. Audiences have clinged to American Sniper and it's star Bradley Cooper, so i'll put him as an underdog, but it's really Keaton vs. Redmayne. (I fully expected this to be Keaton vs David Oyelowo for Selma. What the hell, Academy? HE HAD THE SECOND BEST PERFORMANCE OF THE YEAR)  I did not care for Redmayne's work in The Theory of Everything as it felt as Oscar bait-y as anything i've ever seen. That's not saying he didn't work hard, but it didn't feel honest. Meanwhile, Keaton in Birdman was the best performance of the year in my mind's eye. His commitment and strength to a role that defies convention makes him my pick to win the award. Michael Keaton for the win. 

And Now Best Picture

For the second year in a row, this has come down to three different nominees. Boyhood, Birdman, American Sniper. (I was deeply moved by Selma and it's timely messages, but it just hasn't caught the academy's love. It's time for some new blood in the Academy.) Each film has a major strength. Boyhood has it's lengthy production and successful execution of a real time coming of age story. American Sniper has it's patriotic values along with the soulful journey of an American hero. Audiences have really embraced this story. Birdman has it's magnificent cinematography, deeply personal journey, and outstanding performances. Sniper is the least likely of the three to win, but I won't rule it out totally. While Boyhood was powerful, it doesn't have a totally cohesive story more than it has the appeal of it's growing pains. I am putting my money on Birdman for it's staying power. It was not only my favorite 2014 film, it's easily the best. 

ADVANCED "Seventh Son" Review

Let me start off by thanking my friend Spencer Cohen for inviting me to join him in seeing this film before it is released. Every studio screening I have attended has been different and a new experience, this one was no different. 

Gregory is a champion who fights the darkness through out the Earth, including Mother Malkin. When he needs a new apprentice, he must seek out a Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. 

When heading into the theater, I didn't have high ambitions for this film to be spectacular, but I expected at least something tangible. I was let down even there. This may be some of the cheesiest, most basic January fare (yes I know it's February) I've seen in a while. The hokey dialogue, the unfinished special effects, the wooden acting. This is strictly an erector set disquised as a movie in which they run down a checklist to make sure they hit all the standard conventions of what a movie needs to have. 

But to top it all off, the title is never even elaborated on. Jeff Bridges is looking for The Seventh Son of the Seventh Son. Why? What does that even mean? For we all know, Ben Barnes is just a rabbit's foot. There's no explanation as to why a Seventh Son is significant. They're too lazy to even give us the standard, boring exposition. 

If there's any saving this film, it's that it qualifies for "funny bad" status. 

I love Jeff Bridges. He's an amazing actor. But there wasn't even an attempt to sell us here. He's doing this so that we don't forget that he's still here. He uses the same voice he did in True Grit as though it would give him more cred, but it's just not passing muster. 

Julianne Moore is trying. She's clearly trying. At times there is something to her performance, but it doesn't elevate the film to any level above mediocre. Luckily this likely won't affect her Oscar chances. So she's avoided the "Norbit" effect. 

File this one under the Redbox category. It's funny bad. But not $10 funny bad. 

C-

"Whiplash" Review

No matter what your taste in film or television is, you have seen or heard J.K. Simmons somewhere. You just may never have put a name to the face. But he's always been around. He's just never been as spectacular as he has in Whiplash. 

Andrew Neimann is a first year drum student at Shaffer Conservatory. He is desperate to impress Terrence Fletcher, the studio band conductor with noted prestige. He is accepted into the band, but is pushed to his limits by Fletcher's ruthless methods, and soon questions himself. 

When one watches Whiplash, one is reminded of Black Swan and how it shined a light on the unseen brutality of ballet dancing. This movie does the same for music. It's enlightening, dark, if not a little derivative, yet still strong enough to stand on it's own legs as a movie. The amount of mental engagement and the amount of strength that the musicians show really contributes to how strong the film dabbles in realism. 

However, the film gets off to a bit of a lull. It certainly leads to some unexpected and fascinating places, but the first act lacks any real punch besides J.K. Simmons. In fact, his performance may be TOO good for the film. It almost lessens the power of the other players until around Act II. It leads somewhere amazing, but like any good horse race, you want a real race right out of the gate. 

If I am to be honest, I wasn't really interested in Miles Teller before this movie. He reminded me too much of Jonah Hill. (Especially the voice.) Yet we get a really strong performance from him in Whiplash. His determination and frustration is strongly underplayed until the right moments. 

But J.K. Simmons. Oh my gosh. There is an amazing power to Simmons' performance. He steals absolutely every scene with his command and gravitas. He paints such a broad spectrum that illuminates the screen. One moment screaming, another comforting. There is an awe that just comes from his mere presence. He can scare the hell out of you with just his gaze. This is an absolute lock for the Oscar.

Whiplash is certainly a strong movie, even if it doesn't start that way. But the real power is that of J.K. Simmons. 

B+

"American Sniper" Review

In 2009, if you had introduced the charming teacher from The Hangover as three time "Academy Award Nominee Bradley Cooper", I would have laughed profusely. Then again, let's consider that Jonah Hill has had more nominations than Gary Oldman ever has. But that's not to say either one hasn't earned it, it's just something my younger self could have never seen coming. Let's stick to Cooper.

The true story of Chris Kyle takes place in the aftermath of September 11th. He is considered the deadliest sniper in American history whilst serving in Iraq. However, his obsession with serving his country causes a rift between him and his wife, as he keeps going on tour after tour.

The modern war film has been an interesting one to see grow. From The Hurt Locker to Lone Survivor, it's come to showcase the morality of war and how it can weigh on the soul of the soldier. American Sniper is no exception. The most intense scene comes from one of Kyle's decisions in the field and how he will come to terms with it. He does what he has to in order to fulfill his duty, but comes to grips by telling his comrade to "Shut the fuck up" about what has transpired. It's captured the proper tone to not glorify war, not completely condemn it, but to just show it in an honest fashion. Kudos, Clint Eastwood. This is a step above Jersey Boys.

Yet, I do find some fault in the film. It unfortunately doesn't establish the right amount of narrative for us to really fell the ramifications. For example, when something occurs to a side character, we don't exactly feel the amount of weight that we probably be should since we haven't actually spent a lot of time with him. It doesn't really give us what we need to empathize completely with Chris Kyle's pain.  Not a major complaint, and nothing that takes me out of the experience, but it would have made it deeper if some of the smaller characters were a little more developed.

Bradley Cooper has shown us a great amount of range in the past few years. This is thus far his finest hour. He immerses into the mind of Chris Kyle to give us a monumental portrait of a man who was not perfect, but was heroic in his pursuits. Whilst his intentions aren't always clear, he brings us for the ride with his commitment and it's quite noble that how he wholeheartedly sought to honor this Navy Seal's legacy.

American Sniper isn't perfect. But it's earned the high praise. Clint Eastwood and Bradley Cooper have given us a great film, even if it isn't as developed as I had hoped.

A-

"The Imitation Game" Review

It seems as though the last two years have been about changing my opinion of actors. 2013 saw me do a complete 180 on the biggest rom-com star of the 2000s when he was "alright, alright, alright" in Dallas Buyers Club. This year, it's Benedict Cumberbatch. Why did I dislike him? I'll get to that.

In World War II, Alan Turing worked towards the war effort in trying to crack Germany's secret Enigma code. He struggles against the constant pressure to get the job done, and also to conceal his homosexuality which was illegal in England at the time.

There have been (no exaggeration) dozens and dozens of movies about World War II. Some great, some awful, some starring Nicolas Cage. Saving Private Ryan seems to have set the bar on which all of them are measured. That being said, I always enjoy a new take on the war. So riddle me this: What do you call a war movie without a war in it? New.

The war isn't so much the focus of our attention as Alan Turing's life is, but it makes for a highly compelling backdrop and plot device. Turing's story long hadn't been told, but like Argo before it, it presents us with a tale that had been right under our eyes, and makes us look at history in a new light. It's full of pent up aggression, and enough humor to make it a fully rounded film. Yet it isn't really the story that sells this movie, it's the acting.

Benedict Cumberbatch. I never thought that he was a bad actor. It was more me tiring of everyone telling me how great he was. There has been debate over who portrays the better Sherlock Holmes between him and Robert Downey Jr. (I will not get into this again.) Yet slowly, the man has captured my attention with supporting roles full of a chilling yet compelling presence. This is his best one yet. In a way, his character seems like a British Sheldon Cooper, but infinitely less annoying. Benedict is confident in himself and performs his character with a state of mental preparedness that does not overwhelm. He's strong in his decisions, he has magnificent nuances, and steals all of his scenes.

Keira Knightley shines as well. Her Joan Clarke does not go in expected directions, and plays her cards without showing her hand. She's sweet yet powerful. She is steam full of what it takes to fill a strong female role.

Charles Dance gives us more of what made him so fierce and domineering as Tywin Lannister. Perfect to play the role of a man whose authority refuses to be undermined.

I always love Mark Strong. He is devious, smart, and full of that British Charm that totally sold me on him 6 years ago in Sherlock Holmes. (Not getting into that.) I will see anything with Mark Strong in it. He's probably the only reason I ever tried Miller Fortune.

The Imitation Game is full of fantastic acting, tells a brilliant story and a great blend of drama and humor. It's worth your time.

A-

"Selma" Review

Out of all the Oscar probables so far this year, there have been very few that I have thoroughly enjoyed. The Theory of Everything was very underwhelming in my opinion, Big Eyes was good but tapered out towards the third act, only Birdman has actually "wowed" me. Admittedly, I still have more to see, but I haven't been that impressed with anything but Birdman. Until now. (I did see The Imitation Game so keep an eye out for that review tomorrow.) 

In 1965, Martin Luther King Jr. headed down to Selma, Alabama in order to help peacefully protest the lack of equal voting rights and inequality as a whole. He faces adversity from the Alabama governor and President Lyndon Johnson for a number of reasons, but King perseveres using his non-violent methods. 

Dr. King was one of the most profound, strongest, and purest out of all the revolutionaries. Therefore, if anyone is deserving of a near perfect movie, it is the good Doctor. And that is exactly what he gets. Selma is a powerful period piece that is still incredibly appropriate considering the current social climate surrounding today's society. It infallibly demonstrates the ideals Dr King strove to achieve and the noble methods that he took untoward achieving them.

The screenplay is uplifting and strong. The racial tension is brutal, but honest without being cartoony and shows us exactly why Martin had to do what he did. It causes us to not wish harm on those who act against the Civil Rights movement, but see them brought over to the right side. It may show us the darkness, and the darkness that continues, but it gives us the glimmer of hope that Dr King would have wanted us to have. Even when the movie seems to take a left turn, it doesn't leave us hanging and wondering why. 

The main magnitude of this film is the brilliantly strong performance of David Oyelowo. He effectively captures the essence of Martin Luther King in ways that no one has before. He shows no signs of aggression, just persuasion. He's incredibly passionate and fully immersed into this role. Oyelowo has done masterfully, and this will not go unnoticed. If the Oscar doesn't go to Michael Keaton, it will go to David Oyelowo and I have no problem with that. 

Selma is one of the first Oscar contenders this year that has truly earned it's acclaim. It could not have  come out at a better time, and deserves all the attention it gets. I expect this to do very well this awards season. 

A

"Big Eyes" Review

I have a well documented distaste for Tim Burton. His work is largely unoriginal and reeks of Johnny Depp/Helena Bonham Carter nepotism. The man directed a remake of his own movie for crying out loud. If you asked me, the last good movie that Burton helmed was Batman Returns in 1992......ok, Ed Wood was pretty good. That makes at least 20 years without a decent Tim Burton movie. I'm not exactly sure what compelled me to see another of his films, but I decided to give him one last chance. 

In the late 1950's artist Margaret Keane is painting her signature depictions of children with large eyes. However, her husband Walter receives all the credit for them as he believes people will be more receptive to a male artist. With her spirit broken, Margaret is at a loss for what to do. 

After seeing Dark Shadows, my thoughts were that the only way Tim Burton can stay relevant is to mix up his style. That movie was a huge stinking pile of garbage and that's because it wasn't so much an adaptation of the television show, as much it was an excuse to instill a melee of Burton-isms. To my pleasant surprise, Tim Burton seems to have learned something. 

Big Eyes isn't the Hot Topic commercial that Burton has been making with his most recent movies. It's more honest. The story is very well crafted (yes I know it's a true story), telling us a strong tale of how women were kept down, and then they find their voice. It's a strong feminist message, one that's appropriate for our time. 

Burton hasn't taken this opportunity to make it about him and his quirks, he respects the source material too much, and for that I commend him. There is a sequence involving the application of the "big eyes" to Margaret's imagination, but it doesn't feel out of place. It works in the sense of the character and the turmoil she is experiencing. 

However, and no spoilers, the third act is a little cheesy. It gets a little out of hand with the actions that Walter chooses, and it kinda takes you out of it. But thankfully, this doesn't last too long or ruin what came before.

Amy Adams has a wide range, one that can go from innocence to empowerment to depression as fast as shifting gears on a Pontiac. We feel the strength she puts into Margaret and we cry for her when she is being silenced. When she finally lets loose, it's rewarding. 

There will eventually come a day when I grow tired of Christoph Waltz. Today is not that day. He lures you in with his trademark charm, and you follow him for the most part without really knowing why. Even when he isn't acting reasonably, you still go along with it, because damn that man is persuasive. He's deliciously wicked, and that makes him all the more dangerous. 

All in all, Big Eyes is Tim Burton's best movie in 20 years. It has some minor issues, but it's very strongly acted and told. 

B+

"The Theory of Everything" Review

I've never really known too much about Stephen Hawking. Some people think of him as that "wheelchair smart guy who occasionally pops up in The Big Bang Theory." The more intellectually based know him as one of the most groundbreaking theoretical physicists who has ever lived, and has shaped the modern scientific community. But I don't presume to paraphrase his Wikipedia page. I decided to let this movie tell me his story the way it has chosen. 

The Theory of Everything tells us the love story between Jane Wilde and Stephen Hawking as he develops ALS and defies all expectations with his theories and discoveries despite his handicap.

There is always that one Oscar probable that just doesn't measure up for me, despite what everyone else says. I like to call it Oscar Cheese. 

Firstly, the film does tell a great story. That much is clear. It's a fully thought through story, and it's interesting to see how the relationship between these two flourishes and goes through it's trials. It's not dissimilar to Breaking Bad in a way. The key difference being that the male protagonist here does not start cooking drugs and killing people after his diagnosis. The comparison is a small bit of a stretch, but it's there when you think about it. 

However, and I don't know exactly how this is actually possible, but the film is both slow AND rushed. It dives into aspects of Hawking's life head on without really getting to the meat. It's passive aggressive in a way. It expects us to understand most of the material upon arrival. It starts off running, and wants us to catch up. And the slowness comes in when we see parts of Hawking's life that maybe we can go past. We know how the ALS will come into play, and we know that he eventually receives his computer speaker. But it meanders too slowly on it's way between plot points. 

Frankly, it also feels like it was made purely for Oscar nominations. It's clear they respect the material, but the execution just doesn't feel honest. It feels very hokey in moments which are clearly meant to be dramatic. 

Eddie Redmayne is clearly trying his hardest here. And yes, he does do an admirable job. But it just doesn't feel as strong as I had thought it would be. He has done a ton of work towards this role, but it somehow doesn't feel very sincere. For pure commitment, I will applaud him. 

Felicity Jones gives us a really devoted performance, letting us into her heart when she is struggling to deal with all her obstacles. We can understand why she does what she does, and even if we don't agree with her character's choices, we can appreciate how strongly Jones has committed to them.

The Theory of Everything has a strong story, decent performances, but it's boring to put it lightly. It will most likely appear in ceremony, but I would be surprised if it took home anything major. 

C+