MOVIE REVIEW: A Good Day to Die Hard (2013)

Okay, so, it appears I may not exactly be in agreement with the general consensus who believes John McClane's 5th installment: A Good Day to Die Hard is a complete disaster, but it was a fun way to spend an afternoon. The reality of the matter is, the film is a fairly ordinary action picture that brings nothing new to the table, save for some flashy action sequences. Add some daddy-issues to the mix and you've got some cinematic vodka with a forgettable aftertaste.

Some time after his last adventure, John McClane is in Moscow, expecting to see his son after a fiasco has landed him in court. Unfortunately for both of them, terrorists attack the courthouse, leading McClane Sr. in pursuit of Jr. He then discovers Jack is actually involved with the CIA, charged with protecting one of the terrorists. Eventually, they are led to Chernobyl, where they stumble upon a scheme to unearth billions of dollars vaulted away in an abandoned warehouse - the expected pyrotechnics ensuing.

It could have honestly been any other nondescript action movie, but it just happens to have the Die Hard monniker attached to it. There's nothing particularly ground-breaking or exciting that this film brings to the series, save for one decent car chase and a guy getting killed by helicopter rotors. Bruce Willis is even lacking his memorable spate of one-liners, reduced to a tired running gag where he spats some variation of "I'm on vacation" whenever given the chance. Much of the plot isn't very coherent, but then again, it probably wasn't meant to be.

It's a rather odd scenario when your PG-13 predecessor happened to be a much better movie, and didn't need much of the excesses that this one is dependent on. Off the top of my head: CGI and nearly every Russian stereotype from St. Petersburg to Siberia. Even still, if the screenwriter actually did his homework, he'd realize that Chernobyl is actually in the Ukraine, and a 12-hour drive from Moscow that McClane and son seem to accomplish within an evening. For what it's worth, Die Hard 5 is probably a rental at best, unless you're a fan with relatively tempered expectations.

5/10

Peace,
- Jon

MOVIE REVIEW: The Last Stand (2013)

Ah, Ahnuld, how the mighty have fallen in the past couple years. Yet while I objectively consider his personal convictions reprehensible, he still knows how to sell me a good action picture. Call me a sucker, but even Snooki has her fervent admirers; I simply pick and choose what is entertaining to me, regardless of what a person's lifestyle dictates. Enter The Last Stand, Arnold Schwarzenegger's latest action picture that's a goofy send-up of what I inferred was high-concept, Die Hard rip-offs that permeated the early 90s. It's nothing groundbreaking, but will fit the bill for those going in who know what to expect.

Ray Owens is a beat-down sheriff of a small, Texas town. When a Mexican drug cartel invades with a cutting-edge, high speed sports car, capable of transcending the border at an incredible rate, Owens needs to band together a ramshackle group of deputies when the FBI leaves them hanging dry in order to take them down.

This is your typical burger-and-fries action picture; I could have honestly waited for this on Blu-Ray with a hackneyed plot that didn't bring anything new to the table; avenging fallen comrades, retribution for past wrongs, and greedy turncoat double-agents, Arnold barely even gives any memorable one-liners. Much of the first half of the movie is pretty meh, but things pick up in spades when the big action spectacle begins. The action delivers in the most over-the-top fashion - bodies are blown apart, a peeved old lady ices a thug with a Colt .45, and there's a lot of the usual, "Jackass" physical humor from Johnny Knoxville. I had a lot of fun watching it for what it was as a casual action fan, everyone else may just want to stick with renting.

6/10

Peace,

MOVIE REVIEW: Zero Dark Thirty (2012)

Ten years ago, Kathryn Bigelow was known for some cult horror films, big-budget flops, Point Break, and being the ex-wife of James Cameron. In 2009, she sent Hollywood afire with the Iraq war-themed Hurt Locker, which won the Academy Award for Best Picture and giving her the distinction of being the first woman to win Best Director - both prizes were even lost by her ex, Cameron, for his work on the ambitious, sci-fi epic Avatar. Three years later, followed by lots of research and ensuing controversy, Bigelow returns with Zero Dark Thirty, an incendiary account of the CIA agent who spent ten years locating the hideout of the new millennium terrorist-at-large, Osama Bin Laden, and the ensuing Navy SEAL operation.

Zero Dark Thirty opens up with a black tableau, solely portraying audio of the 9/11 attacks. Two years later, rookie CIA agent, only known to the audience as "Maya," is brought in to assist with the interrogation of a terrorist, but questions the ethics in which her supervisor handles the punishment. Jessica Chastain delivers a wonderful performance that evokes memories of watching Sigourney Weaver and Jodie Foster in their landmark, '80s roles. As Maya works her way through the annals of CIA information, we are treated to a mystery that unravels like a ball of yarn over the course of two-and-a-half-hours. The investigation begins to visibly affect Maya's social relationships - colleagues are killed, bridges are burnt. She also struggles to convince her male superiors of a huge lead discovered in Pakistan - likely Bigelow's subtle attempt at injecting a strong feminist theme. Eventually, once the writing's on the wall, the story shifts to the fateful SEAL Operation, and becomes the most tense thirty minutes I've seen in a film, yet so far.

In many ways, Zero Dark Thirty is like the "sister" film to it's "brother" Hurt Locker; both explore themes of committed government employees who bear huge responsibilities at the sacrifice of a normal life and a job that constantly challenges their emotions and personal morals. It's no question that Bigelow is a pro at this sort of drama; all the while presenting it in a straightforward, docudrama-like format that evokes the early works of Scorsese. For many, Zero will be a hard pill to swallow - it's a long movie that runs at a brisk pace, but is saturated in Pro-Americanism (warts and all) and entertaining to at the very least, spy film aficionados and political buffs (in other words, my grandmother would be bored or repulsed out of her mind). Regardless, this is living history on celluloid. The controversy regarding the sources where screenwriter Mark Boal drew his sources from may have neutered it's Oscar chances, but it's an important film, and certainly one of the year's best.

9/10

Peace.

MOVIE REVIEW: Django Unchained (2012)

Dear Quentin Tarantino: I've long admired your work since I first saw Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction when I was 16 years old. Since the release of Inglourious Basterds nearly four years ago, you've convinced me that it's entirely possible to forge historical fiction out of pulpy, B-movie tropes and make them chillingly relevant, whilst being overwhelmingly entertaining. The closest comparison I can make to this technique are postmodern adaptations of Shakespeare I've seen developed for theatre, but even that is a loose comparison. Here, the execution with Django Unchained, while controversial, is absolutely flawless.

1858, the American South. German dentist King Shultz purchases Django, a slave, from a travelling slave-owner. Dr. Shultz shoots the slave-owner, dead and frees his captives. He reveals to Django he is actually a bounty hunter and trains Django to be his apprentice. After a year of lucrative exploits, Django reveals to Shultz he has a wife, Broomhilda. Enchanted by their personal history (due to a coincidental connection with her name to German lore), Shultz agrees to help Django find Broomhilda, who happens to be owned by a wealthy plantation owner named Calvin Candie. Candie also happens to be sadistic, shrewd, and morally corrupt; a fact the duo must deal with in order to leave with Broomhilda, and their lives.

Django is essentially a spaghetti western set amidst a pre-American Civil War, Deep South backdrop. Like my earlier comparison with Shakespeare, here, the setting is Tarantino's canvas, and the genre serves as his colors. The heroes of spaghetti westerns were typically regarded as social outcasts or marked men who had nothing to lose in order to reach their goals. Django is a freed slave, but gains individual strength upon his freedom and legendary status (because in 1858, an African-American, in dapper attire on a horse is going to draw attention). The stories usually dealt with reclaiming lost love or gold, here we get both, and with the similar quality of blood-soaked, graphic violence that made counterculture American westerns like The Wild Bunch so notorious. It's a daring artistic proposition, that entertainingly pays off.

Aside from the violence, the only thing that will potentially repel viewers from Django is the blatant displays of racism portrayed in the film. Yet, the racism in Django, while a subconscious political statement, is really a dramatic device used by Tarantino to remind viewers of how society viewed each other during this time period (one sequence involving a pre-KKK movement comes off as comically brilliant). Interestingly, I remember hearing very little about the anti-German sentiment and antisemitism that was portrayed in Inglourious Basterds. It is my personal opinion, as horrible as they are, that historical depictions of racism must avoid censorship, as a reminder of how far away we've matured as a society, and as a lesson why we should never tolerate them again.

Bold, ingenious, audacious. Django Unchained is currently my favorite film of 2012.

10/10

Peace,
- Jon

MOVIE REVIEW: Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter (2012)

Revisionist/alternative history is slowly becoming a favorite genre of mine. About a year ago, I read Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, also by Seth Grahame-Smith. I thought it was moderately enjoyable, having not read the Jane Austen novel, I couldn't appreciate the throwback references. However, when I caught wind of a film adaptation for one of his works; Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, I had to give it a shot.

Seeking revenge for the murderer of his mother, a young Abe Lincoln is rescued by a self-proclaimed vampire hunter, who begins to train him to be America's answer to Van Helsing. He learns that American vampires were descended from one in New Orleans, and have plans to turn the nation into a land of undead. Lincoln enters politics, and becomes President, but somehow needs to find a way to protect his secret identity from his family and the nation, in order to avoid opening a Pandora's Box of fear upon America.

AL:VH is basically a story of style over substance. I don't know if it was the storyline or the hammy, theatrical approach to the acting that resulted in something lost in translation for me, but the execution of the narrative for some reason didn't click with me. In fact, I got a little bored with a good chunk of the story. Fortunately, the film has enough action to spare, and comes off as very over-the-top yet grand when juxtaposed against the Civil War setting. While in the end, I didn't have much to say about the film as a whole, I appreciated it's sense of spectacle and look forward to the next Grahame-Smith adaptation...just as long as they work on tweaking the script a bit more.

6/10

Peace,
- Jon

MOVIE REVIEW: Silent Night (2012)

Yes Virginia, there are killer Santa films. Quite a few in fact, although none of them in particular have been very good. Silent Night in fact happens to be a "loose remake" of a controversial 80s slasher called (more pretentiously) Silent Night Deadly Night. I have seen the original before, and by all means, it's one tasteless, sick puppy of a film. It's not enjoyable by any stretch if you're looking for entertainment, but requires the viewer to suspend some moral fiber in case it might offend (a couple shots of strong eggnog will help). I have no interest in reviewing it for the sake of my sanity, but I came across the remake out of low expectations that maybe they tried something different and markedly improved. The result? Yes, but not by much...

In a small, Wisconsin town on Christmas Eve, the Sherriff and his young, attractive Deputy have responded to a bizarre murder where the killer has allegedly been sighted as wearing a Santa suit. That's bad news for the populace, because the town is so fired up for Christmas that they throw an annual Santa parade, complete with hundreds of potential suspects dressed as St. Nick. Each killing leads the duo to piece together a pattern to the murders, until they discover the killer Kringle's true motive.

The most distinct aspect this film has going for it is the police procedural, mystery edge to the story, that's helmed by the Sherriff and Deputy. The problem is, it's done a little clumsily, with a lot of guess-work going on in an attempt to create what ends up being poorly-written suspense that's barely worthy of "CSI." The rest is typical, ultra-violent, slasher fare with creative "kill-scenes" that are obviously a throwback to the 80s - bratty girl electrocuted by cattle prod, topless porn actress fed into a woodchipper, elf-clad blonde impaled on deer antlers (which also happened in the original) - I swear, I'm not making any of this up. Surely there's a core audience who...appreciates...this sort of stuff. Most of the time, I was either wincing or raising my eyebrows in disbelief.

I guess what the film does have going for it is Jamie King's performance as the Deputy, since she really manages to come off as the only relatable character in the entire story. Even the killer's identity feels like something of an afterthought, tacked onto the "meh" screenplay and leaving the door open for a possible slew of direct-to-DVD sequels. Also, let's face it: Most of my generation was raised on a diet of chipper Christmas films, only to discover "alternative" fare like Gremlins, or Die Hard in later years. I always welcome something "different" for the holidays. The only difference between those films and Silent Night, is that they were better films.

6/10

Peace,
- Jon

MOVIE REVIEW: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)

Hello everyone, hope you're all enjoying your holidays. I've been back from school for roughly about a week, but have resumed blogging after a week of decadence. I just needed some "me" time, but now I'm done. Anyway, for the first of my three reviews, here's The Hobbit.

Most Tolkien fans are already familiar with the story: prior to Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Bilbo Baggins is paid a visit by Gandalf and a group of dwarves who he joins on a quest to reclaim their kingdom from a threatening dragon. Although Bilbo is reluctant at first, he discovers a sense of adventure amidst the journey, including a fateful encounter with a wayward hobbit named Gollum and "The One Ring."

Putting it nicely, The Hobbit is to Lord of the Rings what the Star Wars prequels are to the original trilogy. Some may cry blasphemy at my comparison, but I generally enjoyed those films, even if they were wholly inferior in comparison to their predecessors. The Hobbit dazzles viewers with the help of a ten-year advance in special effects between the series. Although I did not see the film in it's controversially ground-breaking, "soap opera-like" 48 frames-per-second, I've seen enough film and TV on LCD projections that I know it's really best served for films like these where the "smoothness" makes the CGI less obvious. At 169 minutes, it's a long endeavor, but with enough adventure, imagination, and distinct characters that it will keep your attention.

The Hobbit's biggest flaw is that it's esotericism comes with a strong reliance on comic relief, whereas viewers unfamiliar with Tolkien at the time Lord of the Rings was released (like me) were tenaciously drawn into the world of Middle Earth thanks to the trilogy's strong dramatic thrust. The Hobbit leans heavily on mild-frathouse humor, mostly from the dwarves. While it worked in bits and pieces in Rings, here it feels at times excessive, and borders on amateurish. Mature audiences (like my parents) will likely be bored by these antics, but the target teenage audience will likely gobble it up.

Most sentimentally, The Hobbit is a welcome reunion to Middle Earth for characters that were originally introduced in the series, and then some. I doubt it will win serious artistic accolades, but as a technical powerhouse, it is a force to be reckoned with.

7/10

Peace,
- Jon