Review: Fast and Furious 6

There is a substantial segment of the film criticism/movie news community that is in love with the Fast and Furious franchise.  In the lead up to the release of Fast 6 (or Furious 6, as the filmmakers would apparently like us to call it) Twitter was aflutter with excitement from some very respectable commentators.  I was baffled by this early buzz. Confession time!  I had never seen a Fast and Furious film until my dear sister dragged me to a showing of Fast Five when she was visiting two years ago.  I went in with high expectations because of the 78% rating it had on the Tomatometer (a sky high rating for a movie geared to teenagers, I thought).  I was shocked at how bad the acting and dialogue were and laughed out loud more than once at its open-faced silliness.

So, when I decided to go see Fast 6 I had conflicted expectations.  On the one hand, I expected the terrible dialogue and acting as well as outlandish action scenes that will defy any sense of realism.  But, on the other hand, I wanted to undergo what many folks experience when seeing these movies.  My encounter was something else entirely.

The Good
The action scenes are extremely well executed.  In fact, I would daresay that the action sequences in Furious 6 are the best since Casino Royale.  I found myself entirely engaged with the actors and their escapades.

It is also well shot.  The camera is well placed and expresses a scene fairly accurately.

The characters are quite fleshed out and are actually very funny at times.  The parts that are funny are very funny and work well.

The Bad
Apparently the folks in the world of film criticism I look up to most have no problem suspending disbelief when enjoying these movies.  There is a plethora of scenes that not only break the laws of probability, but also break the laws of physics and reality.  Early on in the film, I just expressed incredulity inwardly or to my brother-in-law (whom went to the movie with me) about how ridiculous a scene was.  Then, as the film progressed, I found myself laughing out loud at just how absurd a stunt was.  By the end, I was laughing so hard that it apparently became infectious because everyone around me was laughing as well.

In my mind, there is a motion picture pantheon of probability that goes like this:

Bond films

Superhero films

-

-

-

-

Fast and Furious 6

You will notice that there are four layers between the Superhero genre and this movie.  That's how much disbelief must be suspended in order to enjoy this movie.  

The acting wasn't absolutely terrible, yet there were some painful performances.  Gina Carano stood out like a sore thumb, which is too bad because I really liked her in Haywire.  I guess this shows that having a character-driven director like Soderbergh really makes a huge difference. 

The emotional closure/climax scenes in this particular piece of cinema are worse than just about anything I can think of right now.  It is on the level of Eragon, which I consider to be the bottom of the barrel of fantasy films.  

Conclusion

Overall, the movie is fun and pretty much defines the popcorn flick genre.  When compared to other popcorn films, it's quite good and well worth your time.  However, when I try to compare it to other cinema this summer, it falls very much short.  I'll recommend it to those who have enjoyed the other films in the franchise, but to none else.  2.5/5 Disco Balls. 

Parents Guide

While there is no explicit nudity, there is an awful lot of skin.  I felt that the violence was pretty mild, with very few people actually dying.  With that being said, that is a lot of hand-to-hand combat and some very tense chase scenes.  

Star Trek Into Darkness

I'll admit it: I'm not a Trekkie.  In fact, I have never enjoyed a single episode of The Next Generation, albeit I did enjoy most of the TNG movies.  I realize that this makes you question my geek credentials, but it's true.  However, I did enjoy the 2009 reboot, with its more accessible characters, breathtaking camera work, and breakneck pace.  In 2009, it was my top movie of the year.

So, the question I had going into viewing Star Trek Into Darkness was, 'Could JJ Abrams do it again?'  I do contend that his 2009 masterpiece is his best to date, despite Super 8 being a disaster.  I'm here to answer said question, and I will try as hard as I know how to avoid spoilers.  There are more twists in this film than at my local Taco Bell, and these twists are what determine whether it's just a good film, or a great one.

THE BAD
There were times that some of the emotional climaxes seemed forced, or just not well thought out.  I realize that my expectations were undeservedly high, but I just expect better from Damon Lindelof (a writer on the film whose claim to fame is his work as a show runner on Lost) in regards to emotional depth.

Without giving too much away, the twists in the film felt borrowed and even slightly gimmicky   They took a risk in strongly evoking another story, and I'm not sure that it paid off.

There is a scene about halfway through the film that I feel slows it down. It speeds back up, but it felt uneven, even if it was just for a few minutes.

THE GOOD
The acting was marvelous.  I would dare say that Chris Pine (Kirk) outdid himself.  His character had more depth and is showing why he is one of the most promising young actors around.  The villain, played by one of the best actors of our day Benedict Cumberbatch (from the BBC's Sherlock), shines as much as he has in his other projects.  Also, Zachery Quinto (Spock) gave a great performance.  Although, I think that it wasn't quite as good as the last movie.

The camera work is amazing!  I urge you to look at some of the shots and how expressive they are.  Abrams aspires to be another Spielberg, and while I wouldn't go THAT far, he certainly knows how to use the camera to express the emotion of the scene.  It is completely complementary as opposed to deliriously distracting.

As with the first flick, the pacing is fantastic. The action scenes are marvelous and fun.  As the folks on What The Flick! said, the action scenes are so compelling that it makes any of the plot holes insignificant.

The music was wonderful, and I would dare say that the score is better than the first one.

CONCLUSION
Darkness is a fantastic ride and I certainly want to see it again.  The twists REALLY threw me off.  I didn't expect them at all.  Star Trek purists are going to HATE it.  I recommend it to everyone else but Trekkies.  4/5 Disco Balls.

PARENTS GUIDE
The adult content of this film is almost exactly on the same level as the first film.  It has some subtle sex references and some pretty tasteful violence.  There also is some language.  Not recommended for young children, but a 10-year-old should do fine.

Review: Now You See Me

I really like Jesse Eisenberg. I thought his performance in The Social Network was out of this world awesome.  I also really like Mark Rufalo.  His roles in The Avengers, and Just Like Heaven proved how great of an actor he can be.  I even like Isla Fisher and Woody Harrelson! And, needless to say, I adore Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman, two of the greatest actors of their generation.

All this adoration leads up to my excitement for a hugely anticipated film called Now You See Me.  Then I saw that the director was Louis Leterrier, which gave me pause.  Letierrer rarely rises above the material he's given (Clash of the Titans, The Transporter movies).  In fact, the only movie I've ever really liked of his was The Incredible Hulk, which I think the only thing he added was excellent action scenes.  So, I went into this movie cautiously optimistic with lower than normal expectations.

THE BAD
 Although the characters are likable enough, there is a famine of character development in this film.  Almost every character is quite shallow.  I found myself wanting to see the mystery resolved, but not out of any attachment to the characters.  This was so surprising to me because of the immense amount of talent involved.  It felt like the screenwriters were bent on creating a mystery film with lots of twists and turns, but most of these don't involve much emotional resolution.

I didn't find much satisfaction in the big twist at the end.  It felt contrived and made the investment that I had made (i.e. Over an hour of my time) seem almost not worth while.

In attempting to create some tension in the first Vegas show (at least I think that was their intention) they circled the stage multiple times.  Although it was a cool effect, it made me a bit dizzy, which was NOT the desired effect, methinks.

THE GOOD
No one ever said that Mr. Leterrier doesn't know how to pace a film. And it shows: the pacing of the film is fantastic. There is never a dull moment, and the action plays out quite nicely.

Woody Harrelson is his best in this movie. I really liked his character and wanted to see more of him.

The pull of the this movie is the magic tricks: both watching them being performed, and having Morgan Freeman's character deduct how the illusions are actually done.  This, the actions scenes, and the banter between the four magicians are what make this movie worth seeing.

CONCLUSION
This movie is ultimately a popcorn flick: an action packed thriller that will both make you think and not think at the same time. It is a fun watch without much character development.  3.5/5 Disco Balls.

PARENTS GUIDE
It's rated PG-13 for an almost sex scene, sexual references, and some really intense action scenes.  There isn't much blood, but it is scary.

Review: Iron Man 3

In order to prepare for the release of a movie sequel (especially ones I like), I usually watch the previous installment(s) of the franchise.  It was a sweet experience to remember the magic of my first viewing of Iron Man, and to remember the great spectacle of Iron Man 2.  Those films hold a special place in my heart in that they raised the bar of comic book cinema to the level we currently expect.  But, in this particular instance of preparing for Iron Man 3, I think it was probably a mistake.  As you will soon learn, I felt that the movie in question was a great movie, but it didn't feel like an Iron Man movie.

THE BAD

The movie started out quite off-beat.  It was a funny opening to be sure, but it felt so very different from any of the previous Marvel movies.  I honestly felt like I had stepped into an Iron Man knock-off film.  And this feeling was fairly pervasive through the movie for me.  

I realize that after having Tony Stark as part of The Avengers, certainly leeway should allowed to venture into the supernatural and/or unbelievable landscape that a movie like Thor would encounter.  However, it felt like the writers didn't even try for verisimilitude, which I would argue is a huge component of why the first two films were so successful. The magic of watching a guy NOT using magic become a superhero was severely absent. Also, I think in going for more depth in the characterizations of the main cast, they took away the type of light-hearted fun that the previous two installments were famous for. 

I'm kind of neutral on the musical score.  It wasn't memorable, but it also wasn't overdone, which is the tendency for many of these movies. 

THE GOOD

This is without a doubt the funniest of any of the Marvel films, if not the funniest superhero film ever.  The timing and banter are so well executed that there were times I thought I was watching an Aaron Sorkin scripted scene.  Shane Black, the director, certainly knows his way around comedy.  Jon Favreau's attire and hair in those first few minutes were just spectacular. 

Richard Roeper said that Robert Downey Jr. deserves awards consideration for his performance in Iron Man 3.  While I wouldn't go THAT far, I would say that he gives a fine performance on caliber with his others.  I think that he was going for more depth, which he arguably achieved.  

Gwyneth Paltrow was just amazing in this.  She had an even bigger and better role here and she also showed a lot more depth.  But, again, I think that her character was different than the other films.  You could definitely feel the difference in directors, and it allowed her to give a deeper performance, for better or for worse. 

Don Cheadle was probably the biggest surprise in this one.  He rose above his previous performance and proved why he was chosen to replace Terence Howard.  

There is a tween boy, Ty Simpkins, that shows up about halfway through the movie, and I must say he was a delight.  He is probably the only child in the world that can go toe-to-toe with Robert Downey Jr. in regards to dialogue, and actually remain unscathed.  He held his own in ways that a lot of other actors can't.  

CONCLUSION

Like I said in the intro: this is a great movie.  It just didn't feel like an Iron Man movie.  That being said, it should not be missed.  It is well-paced and is likely to please audiences of all types.  4/5 Disco Balls.  

Definitely stay after the credits.  It was so very funny, although not quite on par with The Avengers post-credit schwarma-scarfing-session. 

PARENTS GUIDE

There wasn't much explicit profanity, but there was some sexually related dialogue present. There wasn't any nudity. There was some implied sex and immodesty, but nothing explicit.  The violence is a bit much and would be scary for younger children.