Risen Review: A New Spin On Christ's Resurrection

The story of a Roman soldier who's charged with finding the body of Jesus after His body mysteriously vanishes from the tomb. Filled with stellar acting, beautiful cinematography, and a compelling musical score, Risen is a fresh, intriguing spin on Christ's resurrection and what such an event would mean for the Roman Empire. The whole story is told through the eyes of Clavius ( Joseph Fiennes ) the Roman who must investigate the empty tomb and systematically track down and interrogate key witnesses in order to find the truth, which makes the film kind of a mystery/who done it. Director Kevin Reynolds is in top form, giving us superb camera shots that set the tone and convey the emotion of the scene. Joseph Fiennes was a perfect casting choice as the worn, rough around the edges Clavius; his character was one of few words, but you could always see the intense, conflicting emotions just beneath the surface.

After my disappointment in 2016's remake of Ben-Hur, it was refreshing to see a well made Biblical film that was reminiscent of The Robe and some of the better Bible classics, only with a more gritty and realistic edge. Overall, extremely underrated and the most powerful film I've seen in a long time! Highly recommend, especially if you like historical crime dramas! From the director of Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, Waterworld, and The Count of Monte Cristo.

4 stars out of 5

Have you seen Risen yet? If so, leave your comments below! Or, enter your e-mail above and subscribe.

Patriots Day: DVD Review

Patriots Day is based on the true events of the bombings at the 2013 Boston marathon. It stars Mark Wahlberg, John Goodman, Kevin Bacon, J.K. Simmons, and Michelle Monaghan.
    What really blew me away about this film was how authentic and realistic it felt! You feel as if you're witnessing the events of the bombings first hand; you feel as if you're there with Dun Meng as he's taken hostage by the terrorists and his car hijacked; and you feel as if you're right there with the police as they conduct their manhunt, step by painstaking step. But most importantly, you feel as if you're watching real people - not actors - react to the situations around them. Mark Wahlberg gives an outstandingingly believable performance, as does the rest of the cast. Again, I didn't see A list actors on the screen, but real people with convincing dialogue and genuine emotions. A special call out to J.K. Simmons, who effortlessly plays Sergeant Jeffrey Pugliese, the real life cop who, when driving home from a 16 hour shift, responded to a call to help apprehend the terrorists.

Some have complained about Peter Berg's use of shaky cam, but I found no issue with it. I thought the technique was utilized effectively and created a greater sense of tension and suspense. In no way did I think it was overdone. Also, Director Peter Berg adeptly interweaves real life surveillance and video footage throughout the film, often to the point where it blends in seamlessly. And I didnt think the film was being exploitive in any way; the whole thing felt like a respectful tribute to the men and women - both in and out of uniform - who endured this aweful tragedy. It took its subject matter seriously, while simultaneously creating one of the best police thrillers in recent memory.

   

Patriots Day is the most gripping and emotional film I've seen all year. Witnesses of the Boston bombings and subsequent manhunt say that Peter Berg went above and beyond in making the film as accurate as possible. Yes, it's not 100 percent accurate, but it hits the mark way more than most historical dramas do. The interview with actual survivers before the end credits was especially moving and had me in tears. So if you can handle grisly images and near constant strong language, Patriots Day will take you on a journey of human perseverance through one of Boston's darkest trials. I highly recommend you give it a chance.

4 stars out of 5 

Have you seen Patriots Day? What did you think of it? Feel free to comment below!

    

Passengers Review: Sci-fi Masterpiece, or Sci-fi Dud?

Finally got the chance to watch Passengers last night. There's been a lot of buzz surrounding this film, as if it's a great Sci-fi achievement. Did it live up to the hype? In my opinion, no. Don't get me wrong, it's a good, entertaining film; definitely not bad. Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence bring their A game and are a delight to see together. Visually, it's a treat for the eyes. The cool CGI effects are colorful and high tech, but what really stands out most is the practical sets. These are aesthetically pleasing and reminded me of good looking Sci-fi films such as 2001: A Space Odyssey. My one complaint about the CG effects is that they're too artificial and seldom look realistic. They're creative and stimulating, but they were more like the effects from a high quality video game rather than a big budget film. I guess I'm spoiled by films like Interstellar and The Martian, films that demonstrate how amazing visual effects can be and take us to a new dimension of possibilities.

   The movie starts out strong, with Jim Preston - Pratt's character -awakening from hibernation sleep 90 years too early on the luxery ship Avalon, which is headed for the colonist planet Homestead 2. Being the only conscious human aboard the ship, Jim must find ways to keep his sanity. He plays games, goes space diving, tries to solve how he can repair his sleep chamber, and talks to a bartending android named Arthur. After being alone for a whole year, Jim finally finds companionship in Aurora, a beautiful female journalist who wakes up just as he did. The two of them become close and develop a deep romance; but little does Aurora ( Jennifer Lawrence ) know that Jim is hiding a dark, troubling secret that could shatter their relationship.

As mentioned before, Pratt and Lawrence give it their all and have some enjoyable scenes together, especially when their characters first meet. But, oddly enough, it's their developing relationship which causes the story to fall apart. As the movie progresses, it becomes more and more cliché and predictable. I literally saw several plot twists a mile away.

  Lawrence Fishburne shows up near the final act and breaths a little life into the story; it's unfortunate his character isn't around very long. Maybe 15 minutes or so, from what I recall. And remember his cryptic comment in the trailer? "There's a reason you woke up early," he says, hinting at a startling plot twist. Guess what, there is no plot twist! The reason for the sleep chambers malfunctioning is simple and unremarkable. Yet again, we have a movie trailer misleading us in order to capture our attention, promising us something the film never delivers.

   In the end, we're left with your typical Hollywood romance, your typical action sequences, and your typical plot points. Which is a shame, since this film had so much potential to be a great Sci-fi classic. Rent for the visuals or if you like Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence, but otherwise avoid if you're looking for something new or groundbreaking.

2 stars out of 5

Have you seen Passengers?  What did you think of it? Feel free to comment below!

 

The Mummy ( 2017 ) Official Trailer Review

Just watched the new trailer for The Mummy film with Tom Cruise. Looks creepier than the 1999 version, but I have mixed feelings about all the over the top action. It has the usual city destruction sequences, explosions, Tom Cruise on a plane - again. The scary Monster Movie elements look fantastic and blood curdling, so I'm hoping the intense action doesn't distract too much from the creature horror stuff. Starting the story off in modern day Iraq and having a female as the main antagonist is certainly a different, welcome spin on the plot. There's one new plot detail revealed in the trailer that sounds kind of silly, though, and has me concerned: The mummy, an unstoppable, all powerful evil, is keeping Tom Cruise alive because he's...chosen? Because she's using him to gain more power, or something along those lines. Why would she need Tom freaking Cruise to build her powers or accomplish her goals?! Is it his charismatic personality? The fact that he can run fast? His perfect white teeth? Cruise even dies in a plane crash, but her power brings him back to life so she can use him. It then appears that he's virtually indestructible, surviving all manner of death inducing circumstances. Hopefully there's an acceptable explanation for this in the actual film and we don't get stuck with another thin, senseless plot device. 

This reboot to The Mummy franchise will also be kickstarting Universal Studio's Monster Cinematic Universe, which is why we'll be seeing Russell Crowe as Dr. Jekyll. Honestly, I like the idea; even with the quick glance we saw of him in the trailer, Crowe seems comfortable in his role and will make a perfect Dr. Jekyll. Overall, the film looks promising. The visuals, costumes, and creatures all look awesome, so I'll probably be heading to the theater to give it a chance. 

Skull Island: Movie Review

I've been eagerly waiting to see Kong: Skull Island since its debut trailer last year. Having read a mix of positive and negative reviews, I arrived at the theater yesterday with an open mind, and was determined to just relax and have fun. And have fun I did. Lots of fun!

   Many criticized the film for lack of plot and character development, but let's be honest, if you go into this film expecting something profound, groundbreaking or Oscar worthy, you'll be gravely disappointed. But if you're hoping to see Kong crushing and smashing lots of stuff and people getting picked off by gigantic creatures on a remote island, the film delivers in spades. There's plenty of cool visuals and action sequences, and best of all, plenty of Kong. The king of Skull Island isn't just relegated to a few scenes, but appears regularly throughout the movie. Quite the opposite of 2014's Godzilla, where Godzilla was barely present. Kong also looks great, and though it's been a while since I saw Peter Jackson's adaptation, I would say Skull Island's Kong is just as visually impressive, if not more so.

   The best part of Skull Island - besides Kong - is John C. Reilly's character, Hank, the World War 2 pilot who's been marooned on the island for nearly 30 years. Reilly's performance is witty and heartfelt, and he is by far the most fleshed out character of the film. We learn a number of details about Hank: he has a wife and child - who may or may not be alive - and his dream is to make it off the island so he can be reunited with them; he became best friends with the Japanese soldier who was marooned with him, until said friend was killed by a Skull Crawler; and most important of all, Hank loves baseball, beer, and hot dogs. Samuel Jackson's character, Preston Packard, is also highly entertaining; I loved that he basically plays a parody of himself, saying and doing what Sam Jackson says and does best. Phrases like, "Hold on to your butts," and "Motherf----er" are all thrown in there, with the latter being cutoff, of course. The rest of the characters are likeable and not necessarily shallow, but they're still stereotypical and not as interesting or well drawn as Hank and Preston. Tom Hiddleston is adequate as the rough around the edges tracker, Brie Larson as the pesky war journalist, and John Goodman as the shady scientist. But again, do we really go see a King Kong movie for deep character development?

   Still, I was unhappy with how the whole subplot was handled regarding Preston seeking revenge on Kong, since it culminated in such a weak payoff. I expected a big showdown between Kong and Preston, but it was anything but big. So much time was devoted to Preston's hatred towards Kong, and for what? It was as if the writers said, "let's quickly end this conflict so we can hurry to the real finale." Which brings me to my next comment: The final battle with Kong and the giant Skull Crawler was downright awesome! It wasn't a quick, anticlimactic fight, but an epic battle that lasted a good 10 minutes or more, satisfying every need to see Kong smash, bite, throw, and violently wrestle with his lethal adversary. This is by far the best fight sequence I've seen in a Kong movie, and as the battle raged on, my excitement got the best of me. I rose to my feet, tore off my shirt, and began to beat my chest, roaring my devotion to Kong. OK, well, I wished I had, but that wouldn't have gone over well with the theater. Who knows, though, maybe other Kong lovers would have risen to their feet and joined me.

    Regrettably, I did have an issue with a few scenes where the green screen effects stand out like a sore thumb. Each scene involves the human characters and Kong being in the same closeup shot together, and the poor effects spoil the illusion that Kong and these characters share the same physical space. Since these were only a few brief scenes, I didn't let it ruin the movie for me. For the rest of the film, the actors and CGI visuals mix together beautifully.

   What really makes Skull Island unique from other Kong films is the time period. The soldiers who accompany the scientists on their expedition are fresh out of Viatnam, which causes them to bring that war-like mentality with them to the uncharted island. Perhaps this idea is a ploy to make it seem like there's more substance to the story than there actually is, but I for one thought it effective in adding an extra layer of intrigue to the plot and characters.

Final Thoughts

Do you remember back in the 50's when theatres had special weekend matinees showing B movies? Movies like Creature From The Black Lagoon? That's the best way I can describe Kong: Skull Island. It's by no means a low budget B movie, but just like films of that genre, it's a fun, simple creature feature that made me feel like a kid again. So if you take Kong seriously to the point where you're expecting The Dark Knight of Kong films, you'll be disappointed. This is pure, mindless entertainment where you let go and enjoy yourself.

   Oh, and be sure to stay until after the credits - there's a post credit scene that ties this story in with the upcoming Kong vs. Godzilla film. I won't spoil anything for you, but the way they close the scene literally gave me the chills!

3 stars out of 5

Have you seen Kong: Skull Island? What did you think of it? Love to hear your comments!

 

 
 
 

Allied - Movie Review

I want to start off by saying that I absolutely loved Robert Zemeckis's last film, The Walk, and consider it among his best films. So I was very curious to see what he would do with Allied, which is his first attempt at tackling the spy thriller genre.

  First, I'll mention the main thing I liked about the film, and that's Brad Pitt and Marion Cotillard. Both had great chemistry and really sold me as spies who were falling in love with each other. Their chemistry only deepens as the film progresses, so that when Max is faced with the disturbing reality that Marianne could be a German spy, we actually feel concern for what might happen to them.

   Brad Pitt gained a lot of critcism for his aloof performance, with many people complaining that he barely says a word in a number of scenes. So he must be phoning it in, right? Well, here's the thing...Max is sullen, a man of few words, but this just made his character all the more enigmatic and believable. He's not a suave James Bond type who fears nothing and always has a witty remark on the tip of his tongue. He's a spy who takes his job seriously, who understands that one wrong word could mean life and death. This is how Max is intended to be, and Brad Pitt does an excellent job of conveying subtle emotion beneath Max's cold persona. Marianne, on the other hand, is his total opposite. She thrives on socializing and befriending the enemy to shroud her true identity. She's elegant and affable, but hides a calculated coldness that makes her character both suspicious and alluring. It's this contrast between Max and Marianne that makes their scenes together so tense, enjoyable, and interesting.

 As far as suspense goes, the film contains a couple good action scenes, and Zemeckis maintains a decent level of tension throughout, sometimes giving it an almost Hitchcock like feel. Zemeckis toys with us, constantly sowing deeds of doubt as to whether Marianne is good or bad; and just when Max thinks he's stumbled on to the truth, he hits a road block that only leads to more questions.

 The costumes and set pieces are authentic and pleasing to look at, lending to the overall Casablanca, film-niorish atmosphere. The costume designs are why the film was nominated for an Oscar, and I think the nomination was well deserved.. 

  OK, time for the things I didnt like. Zemeckis relies too much on digital effects at times, which was one of the few flaws I found with his previous film. A moving and heartfelt scene shows Max and Marianne sitting together in the desert, revealing intimate details about themselves. The desert background is clearly green screened in, and even though the effect isn't horrible, it still distracts from the importance of the moment. In another example, we see a faraway shot of a fake looking, CG Max parachuting to the ground. This totally took me out of the scene and was one of those "Aha!" moments. I know they were probably trying to save money, but c'mon! At least make it look halfway convincing. They should have gotten Tom Cruise to play the role - he would have performed the stunt himself darn it!

 Another distracting element is the modern day mentalities displayed by most of the characters. The F word is used on a regular basis, by both men and women. Back in the 40's, this word wasn't as sociably acceptable as it is today, so hearing it so frequently felt out of place. Also, Max's sister happens to be a lesbian who's openly in a relationship with another woman; nobody seems to mind or question this, which is unusual for the time period. I'm not saying everyone was against gays and lesbians; in WW2, gays and lesbians were later accepted into military service without question, since the military needed every able body they could to contribute to the war effort. Still, the homosexual lifestyle was much less embraced back then than it is today. These historical inconsistencies rob the film of authenticity and distort the time period our story inhabits. Which is sad, because Robert Zemeckis did such a fantastic job recreating the past in his Back to the Future series.

  The film is also guilty of being a bit cheesy at times; for instance, Max and Marianne make love in a car that's parked in the desert, during a heavy sandstorm. They kiss and grope each other passionately as the turbulent wind blows against them. The scene tries to be steamy and romantic, but just comes off as laughable and silly. Same with ( Minor Spoiler Alert ) the part where Marianne gives birth to their child amid a German air raid. Nurses yell for her to breath, breath, breath as explosions and debris erupt all around them. I got a big laugh out of these scenes, but others might be put off by their corniness.

Final Thoughts

As long as you don't take it too seriously, Allied is an entertaining Thriller/Romance that has a satisfying and unpredictable conclusion. The problem is, it yearns to be taken seriously, but throws in too many cheesy moments and historical inaccuracies for its own good. My verdict: enjoyable enough for a few viewings, but doesn't have the rewatchability appeal that Zemickis's better films have. 

3 stars out of 5

Have you seen Allied? What did you think of it? Love to hear your thoughts!

  

   

   

The Presidio: A Lost Opportunity of the 80's

Synopsis

Police detective Jay Austin ( Mark Harmon ) left the military long ago, after a heated disagreement between him and his commanding officer Colonel Caldwell ( Sean Connery ). Now, a woman from Jay's past is found dead at the presidio, the Army base in San Fransisco, and Jay is forced to team up with Colonel Caldwell to solve the case. Things are further complicated when Jay falls for Caldwell's daughter, Donna ( Meg Ryan ).

Review

Several days ago, I discovered this film on Netflix and was immediately excited! I ignored all the negative reviews, passing them off as the ramblings of deranged internet trolls. Sean Connery, Meg Ryan, and Mark Harmon...how could I go wrong? But boy, was I grieviously mistaken!

     The film starts out with promise, opening with a riveting nighttime car chase that had me gripping the arms of my chair. It was the most memorable car chase I've seen since Bulitt. But Presidio's excitement quickly dissolves after that, giving us a dull, poorly written script with some of the worst acting I've seen from Mark Harmon and Meg Ryan. The dialogue between these two is horrendous; their first scene together literally had me cringing in disgust. It was hard to see these talented actors turning in such cheesy performances, but I don't think they're to blame as much as the poor script is. Don't get me wrong, Harmon had moments where he delivered a decent performance; sadly, these scenes usually seemed to be when he was in the presence of Sean Connery and Meg Ryan was absent - sorry Meg. If there was one redeeming factor of Presidio, it was Sean Connery, who overcame the crappy script as best he could and exuded the charm and confidence we've come to expect from him.

     What ruined this film most, I think, was that it felt more like a soap opera than a thriller, with way too much drama regarding Jay and Donna's relationship. One scene goes something like this: "But daddy, I'm a grown woman, I can date whoever I want!"
Colonel Caldwell: "I don't want you dating that man, you hear me!" This continues on and on throughout the movie, to the point where I was tempted to switch off the TV on several occasions. I mean, c'mon! We have two of the best actors alive teaming up to solve a murder, but the main focus is on relationship issues? And when we finally get scenes where Jay and Colonel Caldwell are investigating the crime at hand, there's usually no sense of tension or urgency. It felt more like a boring TV movie than a theatrical release.
     One of the strange things about this film, though, is whenever there's an action scene - and trust me, there's not many - they're very well executed and had me on the edge of my seat! It was as if the film was teasing me, allowing me a temporary glimpse into what it could have been, which made the overall experience that much more disappointing.

Final Thoughts

The Presidio is a missed opportunity, one that left me dumbfounded and angry. If you should by some chance decide to watch it, just skip to the action scenes, particularly the fun car chase at the beginning. But for those who decide against watching it, I've included a video clip of the car sequence below. Hope you enjoy! 

2 stars out of 5

The Presidio - Car Chase Youtube

Dead Men Tell No Tales: Trailer 3 Review

Just watched the newest trailer for Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales. Looks decent, with all the elements you'd come to expect from the series: cool visuals, high flying adventure, Johnny Depp being Johnny Depp, and dead, evil pirates. Wait, dead evil pirates? Haven't we seen this before? That's the problem with this trailer, I don't see Disney bringing anything new to the table. Nice to see Orlando Bloom reprising his role, though. 

It appears this is supposed to be the final entry in the franchise, so hopefully Dead Men Tell No Tales surprises us with an awesome conclusion. 

Quick Thoughts On Hail, Caesar!

So here are my thoughts on Hail, Caesar! It was funny, well acted, clever, and provided a silly but true insight into 1950's Hollywood. But ultimately, it was a disappointment. Great actors like Scarlett Johansen and Ralph Fiennes were wasted in minor roles, with only two scenes each. Also, several uninteresting, pointless scenes could have been removed without hurting the story. George Clooney's character is abducted, but his captor's treat him well, and there's never any real sense of danger. Character development is little to none. In the end, the main conflict is resolved quickly and easily, which left me wondering...what was the point? My overall opinion, worthy of one viewing for a few Iaughs, but not a must see, especially when you can watch much better films directed by the Coen brothers.
2 stars out of 5

Arrival: An Instant Sci-fi Classic

Synopsis

Louise Banks ( Amy Adams ) is a linguist professor who once worked for Army Intelligence and believes that language is the foundation of civilization. But when twelve alien vessels land around the globe, she is recruited for a mission to communicate with the aliens and decipher their language. As fear and chaos spread around the world, Louise races against time to uncover the aliens' intentions!

Review

Arrival is the most original and complex piece of sci-fi I've seen in a long time. Since my first viewing last night, I can't get it out of my mind; each time I reflect on the events of this film, I gain a new understanding of it or discover something I missed. What stands out most to me, however, is the ending. Arrival has an ingenious and emotional twist that will cause you to rethink the entire film and see it in a new light! It's a plot twist executed to perfection, and if you're keen enough to spot the clues sprinkled throughout the movie, you just might solve it beforehand. Fortunately, whether you do or don't won't lessen the impact.
    Visually, the film is striking, with top notch creature effects and wide, ominous shots of alien vessels hovering over grand landscapes. The music is also gripping; Johann Johannsson's score contains the most eerie and unique musical composition I think I've ever heard, which helps set the mysterious tone of the movie.

     Amy Adams, Forest Whitaker, and Jeremy Renner are all perfect in their roles. Adams especially, whose thoughtful and subdued performance emits deep emotion. She's convincing as a determined scientist, but displays enough fear and vulnerabilty to help us identify with her. Her and Renner are good together, and it's their chemistry and strong performances that carry the weight of the story.

     The only issue I had with the film ( Minor spoiler alert ) was one particular scene: Military personnel attack the aliens without authorization, almost killing Louise in the process. Later, Louise awakens and asks the medical officer who the perpetrators of the attack were. The medic casually replies, "Some soldiers. Been watching too much TV," as if it were no big deal. We never see the insubordinate soldiers again, and fail to get a sense that they were reprimanded for their actions.

Final Thoughts

As far as First Contact movies go, Arrival easily ranks up there with films like Close Encounters Of The Third Kind and Contact, and I have no doubt many will consider it an instant classic. So if you're a fan of sci-fi that relies less on action and more upon the science and mind-bending plot twists to grip you, Arrival is a refreshing must see!

4 stars out of 5

Have you seen Arrival yet? Feel free to comment below or leave your own review if you wish.