Today's Movie: Cars 3

'Cars 3' is the latest movie in a long line of mostly decent animated films from Pixar. I'm not a massive fan of this franchise and I think that the two previous 'Cars' films were a mixed bag at best. The first one was halfway decent and the second was pretty lousy overall. 

This one, as expected, isn't perfect but there are a few positives: The animation was solid in the previous two films and this one is no different. Also, thankfully 'Tow Mater' (voiced by Larry the Cable Guy and easily one of the most annoying Pixar characters) isn't in this this one too much. The plot was pretty straightforward and it was mostly entertaining. 

There are, however, a few areas in which this film could have been improved. First off, the 'Cars' films haven't had the best cast of characters. Lightning McQueen (voiced by Owen Wilson) is likeable, but not to the level of other Pixar standouts like Buzz Lightyear, Woody, or even Mike Wazowski. This one really doesn't add much in terms of memorable new characters. Also, while it does have a heartfelt ending it's a bit too bland and predictable, and a lot of the jokes don't hit the mark. 

Overall, it's not Pixar's best nor is it their worst. It's just OK. If your a fan of the 'Cars' characters and enjoy either of the previous two films then you'll like this one. 

I give it a 2.5 out of 5

Have a suggestion for a review? 

Leave it in the comments below. 

The Mummy (2017)

"The Mummy" is the most recent attempt by Universal to kick start a connected Avengers-style universe featuring all the classic monsters (Frankenstein's monster, the Wolfman, the Mummy, etc.). Now, I'm a big fan of all the classic Universal monster films including 1932's 'The Mummy' starting Boris Karloff. Additionally, I enjoyed 2 out of the 3 Mummy films with Brendan Fraser. Were they great like the original with Karloff? No,  but they were fun adventure flicks.

So,  is this latest Mummy film any good -or- does it deserve much of the hate it's getting from critics? 

Well, a little of both. Again, I'm a fan of monster movies and, anyone who reads this blog regularly will know, I'm a fan of Tom Cruise so I was excited to see this. 

Well, I enjoyed it. Is it perfect? Definitely not, but it was entertaining and I thought it was a decent mashup of action and horror. Some of the world-building to established the connected universe was slightly distracting. The action is mostly good, and the CGI is pretty solid. There are a few comedic moments as well, some good and some of which don't stick the landing but it never took me out of the film. 

Overall, It's entertaining. I definitely enjoyed it more than the last film I reviewed... (you can check out my Wonder Woman review by clicking here). Despite a few flaws, I actually had a blast watching this one

I give it a 4 out of 5.

Have a suggestions for a review? Leave it in the comments below. 

Wonder Woman

'Wonder Woman' is the latest attempt by DC Comics and Warner Bros. to get the ball rolling on a successful, cinematic universe that they hope will rival what the folks at Marvel Studios have been doing since 2008. 'Man of Steel' was underwhelming, 'Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice' was overstuffed and kinda boring, and 'Suicide Squad' was just a mess. So, is Wonder Woman the shot in the arm the DCEU needs and is it a film worth checking out? The answer to both is 'Yes'... for the most part. 

'Wonder Woman' is the best this extended universe has to offer thus far. It's not perfect but the good outweighs the bad. I did enjoy it being set during WWI as most movies set during a World War opt for WWII (probably because everyone knows the Nazis were bad, and that makes for an easy good vs bad dynamic). I think Gal Gadot was a great choice to play Wonder Woman and the rest of the cast is good enough. Also, in contrast tosome of the previous DCEU entries this isn't a bleak, gloomy movie. There are action scenes that aren't in the dark or the rain, and there's even some comedy that works. However, while the scenes with Wonder Woman kicking ass are genuinely entertaining, the rest of the film is pretty average. 

Overall, if you like comic book movies (which I do) then this is probably a good one to check out, but if super heros aren't your thing then this isn't a 'must-see' that's going to blow you away. 

I give it a 3 out of 5


Have a suggestion for a review?
Leave it in the comments below. 

Today's Movie: Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales (2017)

I went into this one with pretty low expectations. The first Pirates film in this franchise was a bit better than I expected back in 2003, but the Johnny Depp/Jack Sparrow flamboyant drunk schtick has grown old over the years. 

This one is more of what you'd expect going in; Johnny Depp swaggering about and finding himself in over the top ridiculous situations. It's done just well enough to be moderately entertaining, but the film overall is a bit underwhelming. Unfortunately, the other main characters are so dull that the drunken slapstick and predictable gags are the glue that holds the film together. The plot is pretty much par for the course; there's some curse and, for some reason, this is linked to Capt. Jack Sparrow. There are also some pacing issues and I found myself checking the time more than once.     

Overall, if you like the other 'Pirates of the Caribbean' films then you'll like this one. It's probably not the worst one. 

I give it a 1.5 out of 5.

Have a suggestion for a review? 

Leave it in the comments below.

Today's Movie: Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017)

This one has been out for a few days now so I figured I'd check it out. Now,  I wasn't a huge fan of the first 'Guardians of the Galaxy' film from 2014 but I thought it was a fine comic book movie. (If you want to see where I have it ranked among the other Marvel Cinematic Universe films click here to check out that post.)

So, as usual, since this one is still in theaters I'll try to avoid any major spoilers for those who are interested in seeing the film. However, I will give you a few things I liked, disliked, and my overall rating.

First off, some of the problems I had with the first movie are still present in this one. Now, the film is well made so these are more personal preference things than anything else. Like it's predecessor this movie is jam packed with comedy and, for me, it's a bit much. I like some levity in my comic book films, after all they are about masked heros fighting super villains and the concept is inherently a bit silly. But there are a few too many jokes here and at times it felt like the comedy was slowing down the plot and got in the way of dramatic tension that should have existed. Additionally, I'm still not crazy about all the characters in this film franchise (Nebula, for example is one I just don't care for) so that does knock the movie down a peg for me.

I don't want to get too nitpicky because I did enjoy the film, so I'm going to move on to some highlights. Kurt Russell gives a standout performance in just about every movie he's in and this one was no different. I thought he was great in the movie, I liked his character, and his interactions with Star-Lord (played by Chris Pratt) we're some of the best moments of the film. Rocket Raccoon (voiced by Bradley Cooper) was my favorite character in the first 'Guardians of the Galaxy' and, even though I mentioned earlier how the film is a bit overstuffed with jokes, all of the comedic moments with Rocket worked for me again in this one. I also enjoyed the inclusion of Mantis (played by Pom Klementieff) and baby Groot, who I thought going in might be more annoying than anything, had some legitimately funny moments. Also, as in the first film, this one has a pretty good soundtrack that perfectly compliments the overall vibe of the movie.

Overall, I enjoyed this one a little more than the previous 'Guardians of the Galaxy'. There are some pacing issues but I did get a few laughs out of it and there was some growth to many of the characters. If you liked the first film then I recommend checking it out.

I give it a 4 out of 5.

Have a suggestion for a review?

Leave it in the comments below.

Today's Movie: Beauty and the Beast (2017)

Beauty and the Beast is the live-action remake of the 1991 animated film of the same name.

Overall, it is a pretty faithful remake so I'm not going to go too much into the plot. If you've seen the animated version then you know what happens in this one. The original 1991 film is widely considered one of the major highlights among Disney's large catalogue of movies so, I'm going to compare this one to the animated feature quite a bit.

First off, the songs. What would Beauty and the Beast be without some of that stuck-in-your-head-all-day Disney music? Well, for the most part the songs you're probably expecting if you're going to see this are all there (There are also a few tunes that aren't in the original but they're all pretty bland and forgettable). Now, while most of them are done well enough, the song sequences overall aren't nearly as fun as in the animated version. 'Be Our Guest' for example is good but isn't as memorable and high-energy, resulting in a scene that I found kind of disappointing.

Next, let's move on to the characters. One of the concerns I had going in was that the actors were just going to be doing impressions of their animated counterparts and, while I do enjoy the original Beauty and the Beast, I was hoping that their would be some new life breathed into the material and that actors would really own their roles. Unfortunately, that is not really the case for the most part and Belle's father Maurice (played by Kevin Kline) was the only character that I wholeheartedly prefer in this version. While, overall, the acting is pretty solid (Emma Watson was good as Belle, and Luke Evans was fine as Gaston) there is a lot of simply recreating exactly what was already done. Now, if that's what you want to see then you're in luck. However, at least for me, the result is nearly every performance being a downgrade from the original. Without picking apart every performance, I'll simply say that some of these downgrades are minor, some of them a bit more substantial.

 While on the topic of characters, obviously there is a lot of CGI in the film as all of the inhabitants of the castle have been turned into candlesticks, clocks, teapots, and other objects that would otherwise be inanimate. The CGI is good for the most part, although many of the character designs are less appealing and by trying really hard to make them look like actual real-world objects they lost a lot of facial expressions that made those characters relatable.

Like I stated at the start, this is a pretty faithful remake but, nothing in the film out does the previous film. If you like the animated movie, then you may want to check this one out. However, if you aren't a huge fan of the original then you can save your money and skip this one altogether. A halfhearted attempt was made to flesh out some of the character's motivations but, it is more or less a beat-for-beat remake and I found myself thinking 'Oh yea, that's the scene from the cartoon' rather than getting really invested in the story. By contrast, Disney's remake of The Jungle Book (which came out about this same time last year) kept to the same spirit of the original but still felt like a fresh re-imagining of the animated classic.

Overall, it was a solid effort and the movie looks really nice but, I don't see any reason why I'd watch this one again when there exists a much better version.

I give this one a 2.5 out of 5.

Have a suggestion for a review?

Leave it in the comments below.

Kong: Skull Island

 
1933's King Kong isn't just one of the great movies of the 1930's, but it's also become one of the all-time classics. So, is this new Kong movie as good as the original? No, not even close but, I wasn't expecting it to be. There have been numerous films over the years featuring the fictional giant ape and this one isn't the worst. As with my previous review; Logan (which you can check out by clicking here), I'm going to avoid giving a lot of plot details since this is a new movie. Instead, this will be my overall reaction to the film and some of the thoughts I had while in the theater.

First off, if you like giant monster movies then you probably don't need to bother with the rest of this review. Just go see the movie because there are tons of giant creatures, most are pretty threatening, and most of the CGI looks pretty good. In addition to Kong, there is a giant octopus, giant spiders, lizard-like creatures they call "Skull Crawlers", and more. Kong fights a few of theses other beasts and some people get eaten, mostly what you'd expect but done in an entertaining way.

The basic plot of Kong: Skull Island is just that, Basic. People go to Skull Island, immediately encounter Kong, and the rest of the film is them trying to get off the island. That's the whole movie in a nutshell. Now, this film does have a pretty solid cast including Tom Hiddleston, John Goodman, Brie Larson, Samuel L. Jackson, and  John C. Riley among others. Some of theses actors where put to good use in the film; I thought John Goodman was solid and, John C. Riley was good for a few laughs even though the introduction of his character drastically changed the tone of the movie. Tom Hiddleston's character was pretty bland which was a shame, and unfortunately Brie Larson who plays a photographer does pretty much nothing except snap pictures. I thought while the film was going on that a connection between Hiddleston's character and Larson's would develop but it never really did. Maybe because they were both pretty dull and one-dimensional. 

The most interesting human character by far is Lieutenant Colonel Preston Packard (played by Samuel L. Jackson). After Kong kills some of his men, Packard takes it personally, and he goes on an insane hunt for revenge. At one point in the movie I thought to myself 'They could've titled this Samuel L. Jackson vs. King Kong'. It was an over-the-top performance but it was also fun to watch.

Overall, it's the big, dumb, fun, monster movie I sort of expected it to be. I was hoping for something a bit better but, I was still entertained. I'm glad I saw it but, I don't foresee myself ever really feeling the need to rewatch it.
I give it a 2.5 out of 5.


Have a suggestion for a review?
Leave it in the comments below.