X-Men: Days of Future Past

Here is a confession: I've never been a big fan of the X-Men movies, with the exception of First Class. It's strange because all the people I know who are big comic fans are mostly big X-Men fans, but I just don't get it. And you think I would since I've always felt like I never fit in anywhere or with anyone; so you would think mutants would be right up my alley. Maybe the filmmakers just aren't doing a good job transferring from page to screen? Or maybe it's the fact that the X-Men's biggest star - Hugh Jackman as Wolverine - just does nothing for me. I get that this character is wildly popular and they want to make him the star of everything, but he's just not compelling to me, as a character or an actor. The best thing First Class did is reboot the whole franchise. It succeeded in hiring some truly great and exciting actors to play younger versions of these characters - Michael Fassbender as Magneto and James McAvoy as Xavier. These guys are great fun to watch, and Days of Future Past is a success when it's following them.

The film opens in the future when robots named the Sentinels are threatening to eliminate the mutants totally. The film opens with a fun, but sort of confusing fight scene in which mutants we don't know (if you haven't read the comic books) use powers we are unaware of and that are mostly unexplained to us to fight these Sentinels. Eventually, they escape the danger for the moment and someone has the brilliant idea that Kitty Pryde (Ellen Page) should use her time travel power (or whatever; because science!!) and send back the consciousness of Wolverine to the 1970's so they could stop Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) from murdering the scientist creator of the Sentinels (Peter Dinklage). In the 1970' is the first time Mystique kills, which not only sends her on a dangerous path, but also gets her captured and tested and its her blood that is eventually used to create the Sentinels. We have to keep in mind that, although Rebecca Romaijn's Mystique was sort of exposible, now she is played by Jennifer Lawrence, everyone's favorite silly girl next door who can even make rape jokes and no one so much as raises an eyebrow, so now Mystique is THE MOST IMPORTANT CHARACTER IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSE. Anyway, Wolverine goes back to the 1970's where he finds McAvoy's Professor X with long hair and a small drug habit. He takes some convincing, but the hard part is breaking Magneto out of a prison 100 feet under the Pentagon. They do this with the help of Quicksilver (Evan Peters), who all but steals the movie with his single scene. He is joyous as the super quick mutant who can break into anything and has a hell of a lot of fun doing so. It's the movies best scene, and unfortunately, Quicksilver is gone in a flash.

It's not that Days of Future Past is bad per se, because it's not. It's a fun movie, albeit, sort of confusing and repetitive. It feels like the script gets bogged down at some parts, trying to keep track of all these mutants (also: too many mutants!) and trying to stay cohesive. The movie is far better when it stays in the past, and I found the jumping back and forth a bit jarring. It could have easily opened and closed in the future - nice tidy bookends - while keeping the entire middle in the past. To me, that would have been a more compelling storytelling device, and one that would stick with the strengths of the film. I'm not saying that it isn't nice to see the original X-Men, but most of the cool X-Men appear only super briefly, and I won't try to spoil anything but I honestly love that Anna Paquin got higher billing than Ellen Page for something like 17 seconds of screen time. I could honestly do without ever seeing Halle Berry as Storm ever again. This series doesn't know what to do with her; it never did. Reboot the character, cast Lupita Nyong'o. The internet will be happy. It's just that it's all the same - how many times can we watch Xavier try to convince Mystique not to kill the scientist? And the movie ends with absolutely no resolution. It just ends, almost completely obliterating the X-Men canon while doing so, which is a nice way to press re-start on a series, but also sort of infuriating as an audience member who loves a movie with a good ending.

But, like I said, the movie isn't bad. And if First Class belonged to Fassbender and his magnetic (pun intended) Erik (which it did), then Days of Future Past belongs to McAvoy and his troubled Professor Xavier. He is an absolute thrill to watch while playing Charles in his darkest days. His performance brings this movie to a whole other level and if it was possible to get an Oscar nomination for a superhero movie (Heath Ledger excluded; he's the exception, not the rule), I would start a campaign for McAvoy right this moment. So with the exception of McAvoy's brilliant performance, Quicksilver's amazing scene, and Michael Fassbender's all around perfectness / sexiness, Days of Future Past, for me, was sort of lackluster. In another year, I might have given it a higher grade. In another year, I might have been able to let go of the flaws and just have a good time. But this is the year of Captain America: The Winter Soldier, and the bar has been raised. And lackluster, confusing, jumbled story telling isn't going to cut it with me this summer!

Grade: C+
(B- if I'm feeling nice, which I'm currently not!) (Also, more shirtless Fassbender scenes would have gotten you a B+, FYI) (Just kidding) (Or not)

Godzilla

My expectations for Godzilla were high. I thought if they movie was half as good as the marketing campaign, then it would be pretty great. I've been trying to stay away from reviews because I really like to go in to movies open minded, without someone else's opinion in my head. I did notice a few friends on Facebook say they didn't like it although they didn't say why. I imagine a lot of the criticism has to do with - NOT ENOUGH GODZILLA / NOT ENOUGH BRYAN CRANSTON. And those arguments are valid. However, director Gareth Edwards has directed the hell out of this movie. It is extraordinarily beautiful and visually stunning, so this movie looks so much better than it has any right to look. And if that doesn't counterbalance the negative aspects of this movie, then I don't know what does.

Godzilla opens in 1999 with Bryan Cranston's Joe working as an engineer in Japan. A seemingly nuclear explosion happens, plunging parts of Japan into Quarantine and killing hundreds. The company tries to cover it up as an accident, but fifteen years later, Joe is sure they are covering up something. He doesn't quite know how right he is. Scientists Ken Watanabe and Sally Hawkins know that the nuclear accident had awoken a MUTO (massive unidentified terrestrial organism, read: NOT Godzilla), and they are working furiously to keep the MUTO underground where it's lived for decades. That doesn't quite work out, however, and see the Japanese MUTO is trying to find his long lost love MUTO in the deserts outside of Las Vegas, so they can mate. MUTO's - They just wanna get laid; they are just like us.

And the first third of the film is pretty solid. Cranston is pretty much playing a variation of Walter White, except he isn't making Meth. But he has the same searing intensity, the same "I'm the smartest guy in the room and I'm exasperated by your stupidity" attitude. And it's great to watch him on the big screen. But, then the movie decides to follow his bratty Navy son (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) as he jet sets around the globe, trying to get home to his wife (Elizabeth Olsen) and son in San Francisco, which, SURPRISE!, is where the MUTO's want to mate. This is the entire middle of the movie and it suffers mostly because Taylor-Johnson, who I like as an actor, he was great in Kick-Ass, has about 5% of the charisma that Cranston has. Also, as a viewer, we honestly don't care about any of these characters. None of them are very fleshed out - Watanabe and Hawkins are merely playing scientists, and we know nothing about them. Elizabeth Olsen, who I adore!, is playing the Concerned Wife, and besides crying and looking worried, she has nothing to do. I know this is a monster movie, and we should be less concerned with the characters than the action, but if you aren't going to really, truly introduce Godzilla until Act 3, then you better have some good character development to tide us over. And this movie doesn't have that, save for Cranston.

So, yes, we don't REALLY see Godzilla until the final act. We see glimpses of him. We hear stories about him. The Atomic Bomb testings in the 50s? They were just trying to kill Godzilla. He's been sleeping in the ocean for decades but our Scientists think he can restore order in the world. They want to let him fight the MUTO's and save San Francisco. Godzilla - He just wants to go back to bed; he's just like us. (He's also very similar to my cat, in-so-much-as they both cause massive destruction and then go back to sleep like it's no big deal). When Godzilla finally shows up and does battle with the MUTO's, this movie becomes a pretty bad ass monster movie with epic action sequences. But is it too little, too late?

Not for me. Sure, the middle section is boring and almost none of the characters are developed in the least, but I can't get over how amazing this movie looks. It's stunning and beautiful to watch. Edwards has somehow managed to make an art house monster movie. There are so many shots that are just simply perfect. (To name a few for when you see this movie: The helicopter in the side view mirror of the bus, the shot of the crashed airplane, the destruction of Las Vegas from the torn out side of a hotel, Godzilla's tail sweeping through the Chinese lanterns, and ESPECIALLY, the parachuting scene where they are all holding red flares - that shot, in particular, is perfection). Other big budget directors should be taking notes, because Edwards really nailed this movie. It's easily the best directed movie of the year, so far.

So, of course, Godzilla is flawed, but it's also a lot of fun. The rest of the summer movies have a lot to live up to - they have to be as all around awesome as Captain America, and they have to look as good as Godzilla. Good luck, guys.

Grade: B

Mini Reviews

I have been slacking lately, and I promise to pick up the pace for all my loyal readers (haha). Anyway, I've seen a few movies this year that I haven't had time to write about so I figured I would write a little something about them before moving on to the SUMMER BLOCKBUSTERS (read: Godzilla, which is literally the only thing I care about right now).

Endless Love
Stars: Alex Pettyfer, Gabriella Wilde
Plot: A sheltered rich girl falls for a charismatic bad boy and they fall crazy in love with each other. Dance parties, breaking and entering, and burning down houses ensues.
Thoughts: I mean, the movie was decent. There is nothing special about it, but I also seriously didn't mind starring at Alex Pettyfer (he so pretty) for an hour and a half. Plus, he and Wilde had a really sweet chemistry. And she is just about the prettiest girl I've ever seen. And it just occurred to me that the only redeeming qualities this movie had are its pretty stars.
Grade: C-

Bad Words
Stars: Jason Bateman
Plot: A grown man finds a loophole and decides to enter a child's spelling bee. Bateman's character is pretty much the most terrible person that ever walked the face of the Earth as he bad mouths and tortures kids, knocking them out of the tournament one by one.
Thoughts: Hilarious is a good word for it. Bateman, who also directed, knocks it out of the park with this very funny, very dirty, very raw movie. My only concern with it was that it felt really, really long and it was only 90 minutes. FYI: That's a sign of a bad editor. If a movie is short and feels long, you've got a bad editor on your hands. Inversely, if a movie is long and feels short, give that editor an Oscar!
Grade: B

Draft Day
Stars: Kevin Costner, Jennifer Garner, Chadwick Boseman
Plot: A day in the life of the General Manager of the Cleveland Browns as he struggles to make big decision regarding the NFL draft. Unfortunately, no cameos from Johnny Manziel.
Thoughts: I liked this movie, especially the last third of it which is unrealistic but still hugely exciting (and, just so you know, the real draft is not even close to being that exciting). The movie is mostly held together by the endless charms of Kevin Costner. But the strange editing (split scenes, characters walking through said split screens and crossing into a different space) is really off-putting and distracting. Chadwick Boseman absolutely kills it as a hopeful Brown.
Grade: C

Neighbors
Stars: Rose Byrne, Zac Efron, Seth Rogen, Dave Franco
Plot: A Frat moves next door to a pair of new parents who are struggling to grow up and still be cool.
Thoughts: This movie is super funny, if not a little heavy handed. Neighbors sort of assumes that the audience is really stupid, spelling things out for you, like we can't just pick up on the hints that Byrne and Rogen are struggling with not being young or hip anymore, or that Efron is the golden boy who is terrified of the future. They have to hit you over the head with these things, saying them out loud. Still, Neighbors is definitely a good time. Byrne steals the show, and it's really nice to see a comedy that lets the woman actually be funny and not uptight or something. Also, Zac Efron's abs are a thing of beauty and perfection and I almost never want to see another man besides him shirtless ever again. See it for his abs alone!
Grade: B

Fading Gigolo
Stars: John Turturro, Woody Allen
Plot: An aging florist decides to become a gigolo and is pimped out by his neighbor.
Thoughts: Ugh. This movie is dreadful. First of all, if you are blessed enough to have Woody Allen appear in your movie (he hasn't appeared in a movie that he hasn't written/directed in decades), then you should probably give him the script and let him do a once over on the whole thing. The script is absolutely terrible, with characters acting certain ways with no purpose whatsoever. Nothing anyone does in this movie makes any sense whatsoever. It's terrible. Stay away.
Grade: D

The Amazing Spider-Man 2

I remember an article I read about George Clooney a few years ago and he said something that struck me as sort of genius. I don't remember the exact phrasing, but it was something along the lines of this: You can make a bad movie from a good script, but you can't make a good movie from a bad script. This seems like the sort of easy, simple advise that every young actor or actress should be following. Still, somehow, a movie as big budgeted as The Amazing Spider-Man 2 somehow falls into the latter category - an atrocious, messy, terrible script. Now, all of the actors involved in this movie are great and more than up to the challenge, so they sort of help make the movie raise to a level of mediocrity, but mostly this is a mess of a movie.

The good news is, director Marc Webb seems more up for the challenge this time around. I genuinely liked his first take on the film and although it was a retread of Sam Raimi's Spider-Man film from less than a decade earlier, I thought everything about Webb's version was superior. However, it seemed like he was in over his head. And why wouldn't he be? Before that, he'd only directed a quirky little indie romance movie (500 Days of Summer). This time around, you get the idea that he knows what he's doing. The action sequences, especially the opening flashback to the last moments in the lives of Peter Parker's parents, are fresher and more exciting to watch. But, of course, Webb is much more comfortable with the romance aspects of the movie and if you have chemistry between your leads the way this movie does, you should exploit it as much as humanly possible. Unfortunately, Andrew Garfield's Peter / Spider-Man and Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy spend most of the movie apart. The film opens with Spidey running late for his high school graduation. It seems he is fighting the forces of the Russian mob, led by Paul Giamatti, who will return later in the film. When he finally gets to the graduation, we are allowed only glimpses of the absolute, almost too much to handle adorableness of Garfield and Stone before they call it quits.

Next, we enter into a little superhero movie problem called TOO MANY VILLAINS. There is the aforementioned Giamatti, who will return as Rhino. Then there is Jamie Foxx and his take on Max Dillon turned Electro. Now, there was a lot I didn't necessarily like about this performance, including but not limited to the decision to have a sort of heavy metal demon sounding voice eminating from the heavens whenever Electro thinks or talks or whatever. I am assuming this is a comic book reference, or at least, I hope to God it is, because if not, it's a pretty stupid decision. However, I do find myself relating more to this character than a care to admit - an absolute nobody, invisible, forgotten, ignored and unloved. The man who has no power whatsoever suddenly blessed with all the power in the entire world and what does he do? He lets his anger get the best of him. And who can blame him really? I always liked that aspect of Spider-Man villains, the way they all just seem to be misunderstood. What I don't like is that they all seem to have a grudge against Spider-Man personally. Why not just fight because you are a villain and his is a hero? It doesn't always have to be, "That damn Spider-Man... I'll get him because he didn't remember my name and he was mean to me!"

And then there's the saving grace of this giant mess of a film. And, no, I'm not talking about the chemistry between Garfield and Stone, although that is out of this world. I'm talking about Dane DeHaan and his take on Harry Osborn / Green Goblin. Yes, another villain. But DeHaan isn't just another actor. He reminds me so much of Leonardo DiCaprio and not just because he looks like a young Leo. It has to do with the searing star-making intensity that DiCaprio had in those early roles in What's Eating Gilbert Grape and This Boy's Life. DeHaan has the same thing and he steals every single scene that he is in, and he almost makes this whole, big, giant mess worth watching. Of course, you have to wait about an hour before his privileged rich brat shows up, but once he does, it almost makes it all worth it. It almost makes up for the terrible dialogue and the messy sub plots and the ridiculous "Because Science!" reasoning behind everything. It almost makes up for me sitting through this mess in 3D, because, you know, if there ever was a superhero movie that should be in 3D it's Spider-Man. But very few movies actually need to be watched in 3D (exceptions: Life of Pi, Hugo, Gravity). DeHaan is brilliant as Osborn and even though this movie is already way too over stuffed and way too long, I wanted more of him. In the first trilogy, they spent three movies tracing the complicated friendship between Peter and Harry. Here it is all boiled down to three rushed scenes.

The final act sort of tries to turn things around. The last big fight scene in the clock tower is pretty spectacular and Webb really does a great job with it. Even the things that happen that I won't spoil are totally effective and well done. But, really, it's too little, too late. DeHaan is great. The chemistry between Garfield and Stone is great. But the rest is all mediocre.

Grade: C