[Happy 20th Birthday!] Bring It On (2000)

Director: Peyton Reed

Cast: Kirsten Dunst, Eliza Dushku, Jesse Bradford, Gabrielle Union

Screenplay: Jessica Bendinger

98 mins. Rated PG-13.

 

Can you believe it’s been 20 years since Bring It On came out? Well, I can, because this is the first time I’ve ever seen it. Let’s take a look back at Peyton Reed’s (Ant-Man, Yes Man) cheerleading film.

Torrance Shipman (Kirsten Dunst, Spider-Man, TV’s On Becoming a God in Central Florida) has just been selected to be the new Team Captain for the Toros cheerleading squad. When Torrance tries to add the new girl, Missy (Eliza Dushku, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, The Saint) to the squad, she learns that her team has been using stolen moves and routines from other people for years. Torrance is forced to reinvent the squad in order to win without stealing, but she soon finds that her team is not as willing to adapt to the new way of doing things.

As I stated earlier, this was the first time I watched this film, and when I spoke with other people who had seen this film back in 2000, I learned that I seem to be in the minority. This is a bad movie. I did not find much to like about it. The opening of this film was awful. I didn’t care much for Peyton Reed’s directing. I wasn’t impressed with the acting. I loathe the screenplay. I’m sorry, but I have to speak my thoughts. This was a bad movie.

The level of cheese that 20 years will add to some pop cultural films will help, and I will say, the cheesiness did help with that. I’m a big fan of Eliza Dushku, specifically from the work she did back in the early aughts, and I enjoyed the character of Missy and what she brings to the team. I feel like the film would be more enjoyable from her perspective primarily with Torrance as a secondary supporting lead.

From a purely technical perspective, the film is technically sound, but it lacks any technical flair. The cinematography is fine, but not flashy. The editing is fine, but the pacing is poor. The music was fine, but it isn’t memorable, even for an older film. There just isn’t anything that I loved about this film.

What it boils down to here is that I really enjoyed Kirsten Dunst and Eliza Dushku as the leads, but the film would work much better with the narrative focused on Dushku’s Missy. I like the way the narrative played out near the end. Outside of that, the film just doesn’t work for me. I’m very glad that many people love this movie, and it’s true. A lot of people love it. I am not one of those people. If you are, I’m happy for you, but it didn’t work for me. Bring It On, for me, simply doesn’t work.

 

2/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

[31 Days of Horror Part VI: Jason Lives] Day 31 – Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers (1995)

Director: Joe Chappelle

Cast: Donald Pleasence, Paul Rudd, Marianne Hagan, Mitchell Ryan

Screenplay: Daniel Farrands

87 mins. Rated R for strong horror violence, and some sexuality.

 

Well, it’s the end of October, and we find ourselves at the end of 31 Days of Horror. I’ve enjoyed it very much, and I hope you have as well. Like any October ending, we find ourselves at Halloween, and today we’ll be talking about The Curse of Michael Myers, the sixth and arguably most controversial in the series. Let’s get started.

It’s been six years since Jamie Lloyd, Michael Myers, and the Man in Black disappeared from Haddonfield, and Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasence, The Great Escape, Fatal Frames) has very much retired, but his old friend from Smith’s Grove, Dr. Wynn (Mitchell Ryan, Gross Pointe Blank, TV’s Dharma & Greg), informs him that he has suggested Loomis as a replacement, and now the body of Jamie Lloyd has been found, and Tommy Doyle (Paul Rudd, Ant-Man, Between Two Ferns: The Movie), survivor of Michael’s killings from back in 1978, has discovered that Jamie had been pregnant and given birth, and MIchael’s after the baby, being the last-known family he has. Loomis, Tommy, and the baby must now contend with the dangerous Michael and the insidious Man in Black who both want the baby.

If you read that synopsis and you’re asking yourself, “Wait! Isn’t this supposed to be a Halloween movie?” then don’t worry. You are in the right place. Much like Jason Goes to Hell, Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers was made to expand the mythology of Michael Myers by connecting all the previous films (minus Season of the Witch) and answer the questions that the previous film asked while forging a path for future sequels. Well, that’s a tall order, and it’s the most likely reason why this movie turned into such a bonkers disaster.

The screenplay, Frankensteined together but credited to just one writer, Daniel Farrands (The Amityville Murders, The Haunting of Sharon Tate), tried to give a good answer to the mysterious ending to Halloween 5, one that the writers of that film weren’t even sure of, and so the Cult of Thorn was established, a wacko group that protects Michael and helps him accomplish his task of murdering his family members. That’s probably the least-strange new element to the film. The mystery of the Man in Black is given here too, but you probably won’t care about the answer, and then there’s the whole maybe-possible-incest thing in the script that’s not just strange and gross but also really stupid, but hey, in the age of Game of Thrones, maybe this subplot works. Probably not.

Donald Pleasence does solid Loomis work again on his last film appearance as the character, and Paul Rudd’s debut performance is weird enough to fit the crazy plotline of this entry (though he’s still a bit much), but there isn’t much of what I’d call acting in the film. I can’t say I blame a lot of the actors, though, because they signed on for one movie and ended up making another, using a script that was referred to as incomprehensible.

There is a Producer’s Cut of the film that fixes some of the narrative problems but not all, compiled from footage that was shot and cut after a bad test screening, and it’s not a better version, just a different one. It also introduces more subplots that aren’t ever tied up. Safe to say that, no matter which version you see, it’s a mess of a film.

I cannot defend Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers. As a child, it actually scared the hell out of me. It’s a more cruel version of Michael Myers, and for that, it affected me a lot as a kid, so I will say that part of me prefers this one to the fifth film, but they are both among the bottom of the barrel of the Halloween franchise. It’s sequels like this one that make that whole retcon thing that Halloween 2018 did make sense.

 

1.5/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

 

 

For more 31 Days of Horror, click here.

For my review of John Carpenter’s Halloween, click here.

For my review of Rick Rosenthal’s Halloween II, click here.

For my review of Tommy Lee Wallace’s Halloween III: Season of the Witch, click here.

For my review of Dwight H. Little’s Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers, click here.

For my review of Dominique Othenin-Girard’s Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers, click here.

[SPOILER CHAT!] Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019)

Hey Hey!

We are here to talk a few of the Spoilers for Spider-Man: Far From Home. If you came here by accident, click here to see my Spider-Man: Far From Home non-spoiler review.

Okay, you’ve been warned.

SPOILERS BELOW!

 

IRON MAN DEEP CUT

It’s great to see Peter Billingsley (of A Christmas Story) pop up again after appearing in an incredibly-small capacity in the first Iron Man. What I enjoy is how they were able to use a pre-existing character in a way that forever changes the way we will watch Iron Man, and that’s pretty damn cool.

 

BARF

So BARF was featured in Civil War as a system designed to use drone technology to create visual planes that one could interact with. I’m excited to rewatch Civil War to see how it plays into Quentin Beck’s master plan, which was a great reveal. I would have liked to have seen an interaction between Stark and Beck, but I get it. I love when films do this, using created lore to build upon. It seems that many of Spider-Man’s villains are tied to Tony Stark, furthering the mentor motif with the sins of the Father being visited upon by the Son.

 

AVENGERS TOWER

So there is a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it shot of Avengers Tower, which has apparently been sold, seen at the end of the film that has a sign on it saying “We Can’t Wait to Show You What Comes Next” with the numbers “1-2-3-?” on it. Many have speculated at the fun of this nod to Phase 4, but part of me questions if Phase 4 is all that they’ve been hinting at here. Who bought the building? There’s two ideas that come to mind.

I don’t recall seeing any reference to OsCorp yet in this Spider-Man iteration, so could it have been Norman Osborn. Let’s question why we haven’t seen Harry Osborn yet. Was he not Blipped and aged 5 years right into Peter’s class and we just haven’t been introduced to him yet?

On the other hand, what if it becomes The Baxter Building, thus introducing us to the Fantastic 4. I know that Kevin Feige has said we won’t see them in the MCU for some time, but what if this was thrown in real quick as a sly introduction. “1-2-3-?” could be referencing them. Even if it takes years to see them introduced, this would be a fun little send-up.

Whoever bought Avengers Tower would have to have a lot of money at their disposal, and it was purchased years before we saw it in Far From Home, so anything could be possible.

 

NO STAN

I figured we would get some Stan Lee overt reference, but no such luck. I’ve been claiming for a while that they would find a way to insert some Stan Lee material in each future MCU film, even as simple as a picture in the background, and maybe no one caught it, but I didn’t see anything either. That’s too bad, and hopefully they find a way to correct that in future films.

 

MID-CREDITS SCENE

Alright, so the mid-credits scene is literally the end of the movie, and it’s a pretty important ending that forever changes the way that Spider-Man’s story will be told.

So essentially, MJ and Peter and finishing their web-slinging date, and then, a news report comes on from none other than The Daily Bugle, in the MCU a podcast/internet radio show similar to Alex Jones apparently. J. Jonah Jameson appears, played once again by the legendary J.K. Simmons. There really is no one else to play him. He announces that Spider-Man is a killer and he has proof from Mysterio’s video feed. He also lets the video feed announce to the world that Spider-Man is PETER PARKER!

It’s an insane reveal that trumps the Aunt May reveal from Homecoming in every way. I’m not even sure how they will pick up the pieces of this moment going into Phase 4.

What’s crazy about this whole thing, too, is that J.K. Simmons is playing Jameson again. That’s the first time that has happened in the MCU, so it’s a big deal. What worries me is that it seemingly was done at the last second, so hopefully there’s more to the Jameson reveal than just the shock of it.

 

POST-CREDITS SCENE

The post-credits scene is probably the most shocking reveal of the whole movie and may confirm some of the theories about Avengers: Endgame, or it may not.

So, the scene begins with Nick Fury and Maria Hill discussing the events they’ve just been through, and then, all of a sudden, they both morph back into Talos and Soren from Captain Marvel. They’ve been Skrulls for who knows how long.

Fury is then revealed to be on a ship somewhere out in the galaxy, working with the Skrulls.

Now, let’s take this a piece at a time. In Captain Marvel, Fury is quoted as saying he doesn’t cut his sandwiches diagonally, something he later ends up doing in Avengers: Age of Ultron. Now, this could be a little continuity error, but why would anyone bring up sandwiches twice with a character like Fury. How often would Nick Fury eating a sandwich just happen to come up? That’s what makes it so interesting. I’m assuming that Talos has been Fury at least that far back.

Now, in Avengers: Endgame, many fans claimed to have seen Talos posing as a teacher in the background at the end of the film when Peter goes back to school. Now, I’ve looked at this footage in slow-mo, and I don’t think that’s Ben Mendelsohn. To back it up, IMDb has confirmed on their site of his appearance in Far From Home, even uncredited, but they have not done the same for Endgame. That doesn’t mean too much, but it is curious.

Going back to Infinity War, when Fury and Hill were dusted, does that mean it was Talos and Soren that got dusted? If so, did the real Fury and Hill survive The Blip, and will we see any of that time if they did?

During Far From Home, Fury/Talos is involved in a conversation concerning Kree sleeper cells on Earth, so does that have anything to do with why Talos is posing as Fury? There’s not much more to go on at this point, but it is interesting nonetheless.

Now, going to the second part of this reveal, where is Fury? It appears to be a ship or installation out in space working with the Skrulls. The question here is what would give Fury the ability to help the Skrulls and Talos the ability to help the humans. Outside of being cool, why wouldn’t Talos and Soren be on the ship and Fury be on Earth? What are they gaining by swapping?

Now, I’ve read some online about the installation being S.W.O.R.D., a command post operated as a space-version of S.H.I.E.L.D., which sounds cool, but forgive me if I have no idea what I’m talking about.

That sounds cool, and it kind of reaffirms the general belief that Phase 4 is going cosmic. If Fury is already out there, then it would stand that’s what is happening. Looking at the Avengers as they stand right now, there is Ant-Man, a character who can go subatomic, Doctor Strange, who can get all trippy, the Guardians, who exist out in space, Thor, who is out there with them presumably, and Captain Marvel, who is essentially a space cop. We also have Black Panther and Spider-Man, who I would assume would lead Earth-led stories, but who knows, and then there’s all the new characters we could potentially see. If makes a lot of sense.

 

These are my thoughts on Spider-Man: Far From Home. If you want my full review, just click here!

 

-Kyle A. Goethe

Justice League (2017)

Director: Zack Snyder

Cast: Ben Affleck, Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Gal Gadot, Ezra Miller, Jason Momoa, Ray Fisher, Jeremy Irons, Diane Lane, Connie Nielsen, J.K. Simmons

Screenplay: Chris Terrio, Joss Whedon

120 mins. Rated PG-13 for sequences of sci-fi violence and action.

 

It took me over a year to finally watch Justice League. I picked up the film last year, and I just didn’t have the nerve to see it. After all the craziness going on behind the scenes, it felt as though this film just got destroyed by problem after problem. I read some reports from early set visits on Justice League, and the overall mood was quite good. Then, the problems began. Not all of these can be blamed on any one particular person. Director Zack Snyder (300, Sucker Punch) had to step away from the film after the sudden death of a family member, a move I will never blame him for. So as far as the finished film goes, how does Justice League fair?

It’s been some time since the death of Superman (Henry Cavill, The Man from U.N.C.L.E., Mission: Impossible – Fallout) at the hands of Doomsday, and the world has mostly moved on. But Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck, Argo, The Accountant) cannot. He is haunted by the power he witnessed by the enemy due to a dream he witness of winged creatures and an Armageddon in the potentially near-future. His mission is to build a team of protectors. With Diana Prince (Gal Gadot, Furious 7, Ralph Breaks the Internet) already joined up, they focus on recruiting Arthur Curry (Jason Momoa, Conan the Barbarian, Braven), Barry Allen (Ezra Miller, The Perks of Being a Wallflower, Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald), and Victor Stone (Ray Fisher, TV’s True Detective) to the cause. Bruce and Diana find their mission ever more difficult with the arrival of Steppenwolf, a military officer from Apokolips, in search of the mythical Mother Boxes, three cubes capable of immense power.

I’m not usually a guy for high expectations with blockbuster fare. I personally find that smaller films can have just as much impact as larger ones in the blockbuster landscape. For example, Ant-Man is a fairly low-stakes superhero film when compared to something like Avengers: Infinity War (sorry for making my point with MCU films here). The one area where this thinking doesn’t count is the team-up films. When you have a film like Justice League, it needs to be big. It needs to have those memorable set pieces. Justice League’s biggest problem is that it’s forgettable. I just watched a night or two ago and I have trouble placing most of the action. Not much of the set pieces register in my mind. That’s a problem. This should be the one that reminds fans that the DCEU has stumbled in the past but they’re making up for it here and into the future. Snyder’s departure from the film didn’t cause this problem. Warner Bros did.

In response to criticism, Warner Bros stated that Justice League would have a shorter run time. At least, that’s the statement. At no point in any of the DCEU films, outside of Man of Steel, was the run time every really an issue for me. They are lengthy films but the DCEU always kind of branded itself with an epic quality maybe even more so than the MCU was. Warner Bros responded to criticism that wasn’t really there and shorted the run time, allowing for more butts in seats to see this movie. They responded to criticism that the films are too dark. Again, not an issue that I encountered outside of the brooding Man of Steel, but I just think they respond to any criticism big or small and it damages their plan.

I found Justice League, at the time I watched it, to be more enjoyable than anticipated. I feel like it sets up the team dynamic pretty nicely, and I like where it set the trajectory of future installments of the DCEU, but as a film, it also suffers some of the problems of Avengers: Age of Ultron, where it completes some arcs we’ve seen started and starts some new arcs but the meat of the film is missing. This is especially apparent with the portrayal of Steppenwolf, performed through Mo-Cap by Ciaran Hinds, a tremendously gifted actor. Steppenwolf’s scenes were altered and sliced up, turning a potentially frightening villain into a flat, one-dimensional CG target. It kind of makes Justice League seem like another example of Suicide Squad, a film with great heroes on a flimsy mission.

I really enjoyed the few moments of interaction between members of the Justice League themselves. I just wish we had more of them. For example, Superman is on the front cover and appeared in the trailers, so it’s safe to say he’s in the movie. He’s been through a lot in this cinematic universe, and I feel like he needs screentime to really showcase it. I would liken his struggle closer to Tony Stark’s from Iron Man 3. He’s been through some shit, but he never gets the time for us to connect with him. They could have utilized Lois Lane (Amy Adams, Arrival, Enchanted) to connect us to this higher being, but they choose not to.

Ben Affleck is yet again at the top of his game here with Bruce Wayne and Batman. I’ve been saying for a long time now that he’s the best part of the DCEU and I stand by that claim. It’s a shame he’s been brunted with all these problems that have soured his experience because he’s a damn capable actor/director/writer who really could have spear-headed this whole world, but alas, that’s the way it goes.

Gal Gadot is also quite well-suited for her character. She plays Diana with a sense for saving and protecting, and it doesn’t come off all that cliché or silly. She gets more to do here than she did in Batman v Superman coming off her solo film with such high praise.

The real standout for me was Jason Momoa’s turn as Arthur Curry. He played Aquaman in such a different way than I had planned given what little the audience has to go on so far. I didn’t expect to see such a pessimistic asshole interpretation, but it’s all done in jest with an understanding of his place within the team, and I loved every scene with him as they all brimmed with fun.

I think the plotting of Justice League wasn’t wrong from the beginning, though. I remember hearing word from some of the involved crew that the film was initially to open with the large-scale battle for the Mother Boxes and a Lord of the Rings-style opening narration to set up the mysticism around these items. That intrigued me, the idea that DC was perhaps treating this film like an epic in the style of Lord of the Rings was very exciting. The finished film opens with a live-video of Superman that really just doesn’t sit well.

Justice League stumbles a lot throughout, and it had a rocky road leading to its release (can you say Mustache-gate?), but it isn’t the worst thing to come from the DCEU, and maybe that’s its biggest sin. This should have been IT. This should have been the one to really knock it out of the park. Instead, it’s mildly forgettable and very simplistic. It makes me sad because, while I still enjoyed it, there’s issues abound and I really want the DCEU to survive and thrive. This just isn’t doing it.

 

2/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

 

 

For my review of Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel, click here.

For my review of Zack Snyder’s Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, click here.

For my review of David Ayer’s Suicide Squad, click here.

For my review of Patty Jenkins’s Wonder Woman, click here.

For my review of Zack Snyder’s Sucker Punch, click here.

 

For more Almighty Goatman,

Captain America: Civil War (2016)

captainamericacivilwar2016a

Director: Anthony Russo, Joe Russo

Cast: Chris Evans, Robert Downey Jr., Scarlett Johansson, Sebastian Stan, Jeremy Renner, Don Cheadle, Anthony Mackie, Paul Bettany, Elizabeth Olsen, Daniel Bruhl, Chadwick Boseman, Paul Rudd, Emily van Camp, Tom Holland, Frank Grillo, William Hurt

Screenplay: Christopher Markus, Stephen McFeely

147 mins. Rated PG-13 for extended sequences of violence, action and mayhem.

IMDb Top 250: #140 (as of 6/16/2016)

 

We’ve come a long way with the Marvel Cinematic Universe in the past eight years. Phase 2 ended with last year’s Ant-Man, and now Phase 3 begins with Captain America: Civil War, the thirteenth film in this mega-franchise. How does it place? Let’s take a look.

captainamericacivilwar2016c

Steve Rogers (Chris Evans, Before We Go, Snowpiercer) has been leading the new Avengers on a mission to capture Crossbones (Frank Grillo, Warrior, The Purge: Anarchy). But when an accident causes the world to look at the Avengers as a possible liability, Secretary of State Thaddeus Ross (William Hurt, Into the Wild, Race) is brought in to introduce the Sokovia Accords, a measure to keep the superbeings in check. When Cap puts his foot down against it, he finds himself at odds with friend and fellow Avenger Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr., Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, Chef). Now, as the superheroes are divided in their beliefs of what is right, a new villain appears: Zemo (Daniel Bruhl, Inglourious Basterds, Burnt), a man on a mission of vengeance who wishes to tear the Avengers apart from within.

Captain America: Civil War is shocking in how perfectly constructed a film it actually is. It chooses to adapt a beloved arc of Marvel lore, and it succeeds. It chooses to properly introduce two very important and very difficult heroes in Black Panther (Chadwick Boseman, 42, Gods of Egypt) and Spider-Man (Tom Holland, The Impossible, In the Heart of the Sea), and it succeeds. It chooses to show all sides of the central conflict and create believable arguments for each, and it succeeds. Just about everywhere this film could’ve failed, it succeeds. Well, almost.

Chris Evans and Robert Downey Jr share a lot of the screen here, and neither one truly drowns out the other like many had worried. Whereas Cap has seen how great power has been corrupted in the past and believes that history could repeat itself, Tony has drastically evolved as a character since 2008 when he first built an iron suit. Tony once wanted the government to keep its hands off his personal property, he now sees the mistakes he has made in the past (like Ultron) coming back to haunt him, and we find Tony to be the type of hero who carries his pain upon him, like when he suffered PTSD following the events of The Avengers.

But directors Anthony & Joe Russo (You, Me and Dupree) have dealt another master stroke by allowing arcs for just about every other character in this film. We get to see Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan, The Martian, Ricki and the Flash) attempt to reconcile the horrors of his past. We get to see a tortured Scarlett Witch (Elizabeth Olsen, Godzilla, I Saw the Light) trying to deal with the unique hero Vision (Paul Bettany, A Beautiful Mind, Mortdecai). We get a Wakandan prince named T’Challa searching for vengeance for the loss of a loved one. Even those without full arcs still get a signature moment for fans to chew on until the next solo film. I’m looking at you Ant-Man (Paul Rudd, TV’s Wet Hot American Summer: First Day of Camp, Role Models).

For me, the only disappointment of the film falls in its portrayals of the villains. I would have loved for Crossbones to have had more to do. I would have loved for a more cinematic incarnation of Zemo. Not that these were faults, but it felt like they were tossed to the side a bit. As it comes, Captain America: Civil War feels less perfect because of it, but only slightly.

captainamericacivilwar2016b

For a film that boasted that it wasn’t just Avengers 2.5, and on the other side being told that it could’ve been far too bloated, Captain America: Civil War comes out on top as one of the best stories in the cinematic universe. The Russo Brothers have proven that with a great script, top notch performances, and a keen set of eyes behind the camera, any amount of odds stacked against you can be toppled. Bravo, sirs.

 

4.5/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

 

 

For my review of Jon Favreau’s Iron Man, click here.

For my review of Louis Leterrier’s The Incredible Hulk, click here.

For my review of Anthony & Joe Russo’s Captain America: The Winter Soldier, click here.

For my review of James Gunn’s Guardians of the Galaxy, click here.

For my review of Joss Whedon’s Avengers: Age of Ultron, click here.

Doctor Strange Teaser Premieres to (Mostly) Positive Results!

doctorstrange2016b

Hey everyone, I just saw the teaser trailer for Doctor Strange, the fourteenth film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and I got a lot of thoughts.

First of all, this is a teaser trailer, so people need to just take a moment to understand that it isn’t necessarily supposed to explain the plot. Secondly, this is easily the most interesting addition to the MCU yet. We barely scratched the surface of Marvel mystical last year in Ant-Man, so diving in head first seems like a pretty solid way to go. Overall, I really enjoyed the tease and cannot wait to see more. It gave us a glimpse of dimensional play that the film will take on, and I’m hoping director Scott Derrickson is able to really give it a creepy and unnerving feel when the film drops, as of right now, I’m not exactly sure of the tone.

The faults? Yeah, I can see that there are bits of The Matrix and Inception here and that’s understandable. It does play with similar themes of perceptions and reality. I guess I’ll need to see more to fully critique those aspects. Tilda Swinton didn’t exactly drop my jaw as The Ancient One, so again, not convinced on her yet, although I want to point out that I take no ill will towards the decision to change out the gender and race if the actor/actress fits the role.

Doctor Strange is the story of Stephen Strange, a renowned surgeon who loses his ability to use his hands and travels the world looking for a cure. Along the way, he becomes trained as the Sorcerer Supreme and gains all new powers of the mystical world surrounding him.

Doctor Strange arrives on this plane November 4.

So are you stoked for Doctor Strange? What’s your favorite Benedict Cumberbatch performance? Let me know!

 

-Kyle A. Goethe

Preliminary Visual Effects Shortlist Revealed!

 

On location in Jordan, Ridley Scott directs Matt Damon, in THE MARTIAN.

Hey everyone, the 88th Academy Awards list of films to be nominated for Best Visual Effects has been narrowed down to twenty for the Academy to officially nominate. Here they are:

 

Ant-Man

Avengers: Age of Ultron

Bridge of Spies

Chappie

Everest

Ex Machina

Furious Seven

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 2

In the Heart of the Sea

Jupiter Ascending

Jurassic World

Mad Max: Fury Road

The Martian

Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation

The Revenant

Spectre

Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Terminator Genisys

Tomorrowland

The Walk

 

interstellar2015a

What do you think? Me personally, I believe that the frontrunners here are obviously the soon-to-be-seen Star Wars: The Force Awakens and Mad Max: Fury Road, which I saw earlier this year and should almost guarantee a win for the perfect blending of practical effects and minor digital retouching.

What films do I expect to not see on the final ballot? Chappie, Everest, Terminator Genisys, and Tomorrowland as well as Furious Seven. They just won’t be able to convince the academy that they are worthy of the final five.

It also remains to be seen if the upcoming releases for In the Heart of the Sea and The Revenant will gain any recognition once the films bow later this month.

The process of selecting nominees is a larger one than most would know, as the list will be further thinned to 10 and then each finalist will be able to vie for the role one last time.

Many have pointed out the biggest films missing including Cinderella, Crimson Peak, Kingsman: The Secret Service, and San Andreas.

The most recent winners of the award are Interstellar, Gravity, and Life of Pi.

I don’t know about you, but I am marking my calendar for January 14th when we will get the final list of nominations and begin death-racing toward the February 28th-dated awards ceremony.

lifeofpi2012a

So kids, what do you think? Which films do you expect to see on the final ballot and what are some other films you saw from this year with impressive visual effects? Let me know!

 

-Kyle A. Goethe

July 2015 Preview

 

Wow. Jurassic World, nice job in June. But July is flat-out huge. There are so many major releases and highly anticipated films on the way to a theater near you. So let’s jump in and see what there is to all this mess of movies.

Obligatory Note: Again, I haven’t seen these films at the time of this post. This is merely a discussion based on my abilities to read these films from the outside, and I’m good at it, too, so take it with a grain of salt, and if you see something different, let me know!

 

faithofourfathers2015a

Faith of Our Fathers

I’m not really going to get into this film very much. These “Christian” film releases in recent years have all been just terrible. I’m not saying anything about the religion, so don’t put me in that bucket. I’m a religious person by trade, but these films are terribly made. They aren’t well-written. They aren’t well-acted. They aren’t well-directed. They just aren’t good. This one will likely not change that.

 

magicmikexxl2015a

Magic Mike XXL

Magic Mike was a critical success due to Steven Soderbergh. It was a financial success due to Channing Tatum and his merry men of male dancers. Soderbergh isn’t returning to direct this sequel, but he is editing and providing cinematography duties to director Gregory Jacobs. I don’t think Magic Mike XXL will deliver on the same critical aspects that the original had, but I happen to think that Channing Tatum’s abilities to carry a film as well as provide high-level pelvic thrusting should bring the sequel to moderate financial success.

 

terminatorgenisys2015a

Terminator Genisys

Now for the people that won’t be seeing Faith of Our Fathers or Magic Mike XXL. Finally, after hopping around several studios, the Terminator franchise has arrived once again with Terminator Genisys. This film reboots the franchise in a similar way to last month’s Jurassic World, while not retconning the previous films but really focusing on staying true to the original. I love the idea of revisiting the original film in a way similar to the Star Trek franchise, and I think it stays organic to the rhythm of where the series has been heading. Really, it’s the only logical step to take the franchise. Do I think it looks good? Not sure. I think it looks interesting, but this film’s visual effects were not ready when the first trailer released, and I’m not sure if they ever did get finished. I want to like it. I want to. I just can’t say I know it is going to be great.

 

amy2015a

Amy

The Amy Winehouse documentary doesn’t seem interesting to me. I never found her life to be all that exciting to learn about. I didn’t care for her music, and I can’t say I was surprised when her addiction caught up to her. Skip.

 

thegallows2015a

The Gallows

The Gallows is a new found-footage (damn) horror film about a school play titled The Gallows that accidentally resulted in the death of a student during its initial run 22 years back. Now, the school wants to get the play up and going, and several students realize that some stories are best kept from being told. I like this idea but I’m already playing out all the horrible ways that this film will be represented. There are ways to make this film the right way, but I don’t see it happening the right way.

 

minions2015a

Minions

Minions is the newest property in the Despicable Me franchise. It is presented as a prequel focused on Gru’s minions years before he meets them. Looking at the trailer, I actually really like this film for more than the cute factor. It has a truly morbid sense of style that I think it embraces this morbidity quite well for a film like this. I see definite potential here.

 

selfless2015a

Self/Less

Self/Less is a remake of the 1966 John Frankenheimer film Seconds and is directed by Tarsem Singh. In it, Ben Kingsley plays a man dying of cancer who has his consciousness transferred into the body of a younger healthier man played by Ryan Reynolds. I like the idea, but I’m concerned about the possible connections I was making with Limitless and Transcendence. Elements of this idea have cropped up before to mixed results.

 

antman2015a

Ant-Man

Well, if you thought selling Guardians of the Galaxy was tough, try selling Ant-Man, the newest member of the Marvel Cinematic Universe hoping to build on the success of Avengers: Age of Ultron. Starring Paul Rudd and Michael Douglas, Ant-Man has an interesting style to it, focusing on creating a fun superhero film to take the franchise back from the seriousness that has been building in the recent films. It looks like a lot of film, but many are aware of the film’s troubles past with previous director Edgar Wright and especially off of Joss Whedon’s personal implosion following the release of the second Avengers film, people will be wary of this one, but I hope it brings people in to at least give it a try.

 

mrholmes2015a

Mr. Holmes

Ian McKellan is perfectly cast as the 93-year-old Sherlock Holmes in 1947. It isn’t related to the Guy Ritchie Sherlock Holmes series or the CBS series Elementary. It also appears to be a much more calculated piece, very much like the original series of stories from Arthur Conan Doyle. Mr. Holmes will be a critical hit, I know it was much loved when it screened at BIFF back in February.

 

trainwreck2015a

Trainwreck

I like Judd Apatow. I do not like Amy Schumer. He directed. She starred and wrote. I’m not going to waste my time.

 

papertowns2015a

Paper Towns

I didn’t see A Fault in Our Stars. I’m sure it was fine. I don’t like when an author’s adaptation is successful, every other property is picked up immediately and thrown at the screen. The same thing happened with Gillian Flynn after Gone Girl. I think Paper Towns actually sounds pretty interesting and I will be seeing it.

 

southpaw2015a

Southpaw

Man, Jake Gyllenhaal really wants an Oscar! In Southpaw, Gyllenhaal’s transformation into boxer Billy Hope who is unable to get out of the world of boxing to spend more time with his family. When tragedy strikes, Hope discovers that boxing is all he knows. From an outside perspective, these types of movies become great character pieces but not exactly great films. I foresee Gyllenhaal’s nomination but not much else.

 

pixels2015a

Pixels

I know you want to like Pixels. I want to like Pixels. I know I’m not going to like Pixels. I get the feeling you won’t like Pixels. Damn Pixels.

 

vacation2015a

Vacation

I have a lot of hope that the reboot to Vacation will reinvigorate this franchise. The idea of Vacation is eternal, especially when you keep the family line of the Griswolds with the ever-evolving dynamic with the children. It looks hilarious, too.

 

missionimpossibleroguenation2015a

Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation

The fifth Mission: Impossible follows in the franchise of three other great action pics and also Mission: Impossible 2. In Rogue Nation, we get the whole team together for another romping globe-trotting pic that sets Ethan Hunt and his team against the Syndicate. This film adds a level of vengeance and finality to the film even though I know that Tom Cruise isn’t finished with this series. I hope Christopher McQuarrie can handle this series and keep it alive because I’ve enjoyed my time with it.

 

So there you have it, here is your final tally.

Best Bets: Minions, Ant-Man, Mr. Holmes, Vacation, Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation

On the Bubble: Magic Mike XXL, Terminator Genisys, The Gallows, Self/Less, Paper Towns, Southpaw

Likely Misses: Faith of Our Fathers, Amy, Trainwreck, Pixels

 

So what do you think? What are you most excited to see this month and why? Let me know!

 

-Kyle A. Goethe

Guardians of the Galaxy is the Best Marvel Movie Ever! -So Says Tony Stark

guardians-galaxy-movie-preview-guardians-of-the-galaxy-music-cinematography-chris-pratt-review

Hey there, sport fans. According to Entertainment Weekly, Robert Downey Jr., during an interview with the Toronto Sun, called Guardians of the Galaxy “the best Marvel movie ever.” Wow, Tony Stark. That’s saying something. Considering that Downey himself has appeared in five of the MCU films in some capacity, with next year’s Avengers: Age of Ultron making it six. Look for my review of “Guardians of the Galaxy coming up, but for now, personally, I loved Guardians of the Galaxy, but the best MCU movie ever? Close, but I feel there are a few that rise slightly higher. Guardians, for me, felt like it didn’t feel as full as it could have. I wanted…more, which I guess is good for a starter to a new franchise.

So what are your thoughts on Mr. Stark’s personal review? Is Guardians of the Galaxy the best film in the MCU? If so, does Avengers: Age of Ultron or Ant-Man have a chance of topping it? Let me know!

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑