Les Miserables

Django Unchained

The Impossible

Zero Dark Thirty

Based on the actual events involving the biggest manhunt in history, Zero Dark Thirty is as much about the ambition and tenacity of one woman as it is about the tracking and killing of Osama bin Laden.  Kathryn Bigelow (The Hurt Locker and Point Break) directs a riveting story of the investigation and tracking of bin Laden.  The story follows the young up and comer agent, Maya (Jessica Chastain) and her determination to enter into the darker side of the CIA and find the most wanted man in the world.

The scenes of torture at the beginning of the movie are disturbing and are designed to provoke an emotional response and trigger a conversation about the use of torture and its effectiveness/legality.  While some critics saw this aspect as political in nature and therefore tainted the credibility of the movie, I saw nothing wrong with this.  Most likely this did occur.  Whether you are ok with it or not is not the issue.  Its part of history and at the time, the US intelligence agency was involved in black ops and had secret bases in Eastern Europe.  The military was involved in secret prisons and some of the most shocking practices were brought to light in Iraq.

In similar fashion to Argo, its the most intense slow movie I have seen.  Everyone knows the ending and knows much of the back story. But it is still an incredible journey and an intense one.  This movie may not be for everyone, but depending on your patriotic and political views, you can definitely enjoy this movie.

The supporting cast while not chalked full of big names included some outstanding performances from Jason Clarke (Lawless), Kyle Chandler (Friday Night Lights), Harold Perrineau (Lost), Mark Strong (Sherlock Holmes), James Gandolfini (The Sopranos), Mark Duplass (The League) and Jennifer Ehle (The King's Speech).

Great cast, amazing direction, intriguing story.  This was a great movie and while I feel Lincoln and Argo stand a better shot at winning the Oscar, this definitely deserves its nomination. I give this movie 4.5 stars and think most people will enjoy it.

Movie poster from: http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51D3JoovpEL._SL500_AA300_.jpg

This Is 40

Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann return a few years later to chronicle the troubles and obstacles of turning 40.  While not an official sequel to Knocked Up, it does follow these two characters from the original movie and their daughters.

As Debbie (Leslie Mann) is about to turn 40, she struggles with the milestone and what it means to her and her relationship with her husband.  What is great about this movie is it speaks the truth.  Pretty much every woman goes through this, and generally every guy acts like this.  That's what makes this movie so funny.  You see yourself either now or headed down that road in these characters.

While the movie is a little long for a traditional comedy, it was hilarious.  I was skeptical going into the movie.  While the previews looked good, I wasn't sold on the angle.  But almost immediately the movie won me over.  Jason Segel was a great addition as the yoga teacher that is sexually enlightened.

Classic Judd Apatow movie.  Real characters, real life situations, and real funny.  I definitely recommend seeing this movie.  I give it 4 stars- definitely a great date night movie.

Movie poster from: http://impawards.com/2012/posters/this_is_forty.jpg

The Expendables 2

The follow up to the first Expendables adds even more huge action stars to the lineup!  The Expendables 2 sees the original team back in action with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis taking on bigger roles, Chuck Norris in classic cameos, and Jean Claude Van Damme posing as the villain.

Unfortunately this did not stack up as well as the first one. The first Expendables was a great guys action movie.  Not a great movie or one that was snubbed at an Oscar.  Just a classic- kill em all- type movie.  This one, while packed with even more action, was less impressive.  While the first one, Sylvester Stallone looked old, he didn't move that way- he actually was still pretty impressive as an action star.  And there were several very exciting scenes with Jet Li and Jason Statham. This movie had less of that and seeing Arnold still trying was almost sad.  This movie also tried really hard to add comedy with cheeky one liners.  For example, in one scene Arnold steals Terry Crews massive gun.  Arnold says, "Don't worry, you will get it back."  To which Terry says, "I better. Or you're going to be terminated."  Another example, Chuck Norris does a corny line when he tries to deliver a "Chuck Norris" joke.

These guys are not funny.  Well everyone but Statham and Li- they have their moments.  So when they try to deliver one liner jokes it just comes off as awkward and not humorous.

Overall I have to say this was a pretty disappointing follow up.  The action was over the top, unrealistic, and pretty unimpressive in comparison to the original.  And the comedy was a failure and rather annoying any of them thought they had comedic timing down.  I give it 1 star.  Don't even waste your time.  Rather spend two hours watching the original again during guys night.

Movie poster from: http://www.flicksandbits.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/the-expendables-2-movie-poster.jpg

The Hobbit

After several years, Peter Jackson has returned audiences to Middle Earth and told the original tale that began the adventure of Lord of the Rings.  As a child, the Hobbit was by far the most interesting book. It had action, adventure, comedy, and really was the starting point of an adventure that only imagination could provide the back drop for.  While the Lord of the Rings Trilogy was incredible, the Hobbit was still intriguing because it launches the story by following Bilbo Baggins from the beginning.

Unfortunately New Line Cinema, MGM, and Peter Jackson wanted to make some money and was thus, in my opinion the downfall of this movie.  The Hobbit was not a long book and could legitimately break down into 2 movies.  However greed took over at the studios and this one story is being stretched out over 3 movies.  The shear greed of stretching this just to make more money starts my experience off soured.  Next classic Peter Jackson gives us not just part 1 of 3, but a 2 hour and 49 minute part 1 of 3.  There are some movies that are long and don't feel that way (Lincoln, Avengers, The Dark Knight), but this one did.  

Visually this movie was stunning.  But let's call it what it truly is- a near 3 hour documentary on how beautiful New Zealand is.  It's like Peter Jackson has never heard of a cutting room.  Important scenes get cut all the time from movies, but not Jackson's.  We experience scene after scene of watching a hobbit and 12 dwarfs walking through a valley, walking on top of a mountain, walking in snow, walking in grass, etc.  Only to come to end of the movie, and almost comically see their goal- still far off in the distance.  While the scenery is beautiful, its just too much fluff.  I will say that the often heard complaint that the way the movie is shot seems like it is more a Bennie Hill show with the characters running around like on fast forward, was not something I experienced.  I thought it looked great.  I saw it on a DLP screen and in 3D and both versions looked really good.

Along with the daunting swoopings of scenery, the opening scene at Bilbo's house was way too long.  It was clear quickly that he was annoyed by the dwarfs, but it just continued on and on and on.  

One thing I loved and thought Jackson did brilliantly, was add in appendices from the other books that explained where Gandalf disappears to.  In The Hobbit, Gandalf would always just disappear, and you couldn't help but think this was the most unreliable wizard ever.  But Jackson spends some quality time following Gandalf's quest which was left out of the Hobbit books.

The main complaint here is that the movie is just way too long, especially when you have 2 more to look forward to.  If each one is almost 3 hours, I am already sure I will be annoyed.  However, there is something to be said about the magic of Middle Earth.  Because even though I was not impressed with this first installment at all, I am determined to see the next too, and in fact, still a little excited.

I give this movie 3.5 stars.  While the large set pieces and breathtaking scenery are incredible, I wouldn't say its a must for theaters.  A good big screen experience at home with a decent surround sound system and a mug of ale.

Movie poster from: http://www.thehobbitblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/HAUJ_Bus_Dwarves_DOM.jpg

Seal Team Six: The Raid on Osama bin Laden

Seal Team Six showcases the story of how the Intelligence Community found bin Laden, received the green light, and the Seal team accomplished its most important mission ever.  This movie seems to be a prelude into the more Hollywood version coming out this December in theaters.  This film is a straight to DVD film and is clearly low budget.  But the film is not bad.

The film showcases a B-level cast including Cam Gigandent (Priest, Easy A, The O.C.), William Fichtner (Dark Knight, Prison Break, Armageddon), Robert Knepper (Prison Break, Transporter 3), and Xzibit (Derailed, XXX2).  The acting was solid with enough strong mid level performances without any clear star or poor performances.  The director used an interview style to narrate the film and give some of the back story and inner emotions of the team. While this has been used a lot lately, it was not very effective in this film.  It seemed to constantly stop momentum in the story telling.  Using it as a bookend tool would maybe have worked better than constantly dispersing the film with random interviews with the Seal Team and lead analyst.

Overall not a bad film.  I would call it one of the better direct to dvd action films.  The subject matter helped since it was the first time the subject hit the screen.  However I am sure Zero Dark Thirty directed by Kathryn Bigelow and starring Chris Pratt, Jessica Chastain, Mark Strong, James Gandolfini, and Kyle Chandler will exceed this film in every way.  I give this film 2.5 stars.  Not bad for an afternoon rental and as a great way to learn the basic subject matter before the blockbuster this December.

Movie poster from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2095605/

Bernie

The last few days I decided to catch up on a few movies I had missed in theaters.  The first one I watched was Bernie starring Jack Black and Shirley MacLaine.  I had heard very good things about this movie during its run at the SXSW film festival which is premiered at.

Bernie is the story of a overly kind man who found his calling as a mortician who takes great pride in his work of preparing the recently deceased for a peaceful and beautiful passing into the afterlife while being presentable and easier for families of those they leave behind.  He took his job so far that he would actually stay in contact with the families of those he had prepared burials for to make sure their grieving was slightly alleviated.

His kind turn found himself befriending the local towns hag and who most people in the town called a "complete bitch".  She was horribly mean to everyone, but Bernie became her friend and they built a nice relationship after her husband died.  Her rudeness began to show again though and he finally snapped and killed her.

This is based on an actual true story of a real mortician in Carthage, Texas who killed a rich woman that he had befriended and eventually was caught and stood trial.  This is one of those dark comedies which you have to be able to really appreciate that type of comedy to enjoy the film.  It definitely had its funny parts but most of the film was filled with just awkward moments.  Jack Black was perfect for the role and portrayed the man the film was based on very well.  Shirley MacLaine was so perfect, she was almost adorable at times before you realized, no you are supposed to hate her.

As far as independent films go, this was pretty good.  While not a favorite by any means, it had its moments of humor and was worth a free watch on Netflix.  Great for a random afternoon when you can't find anything else to watch. I give it 3 stars.  Check it out- the main characters are the best part of the film and keep you engaged for the hour and a half running time.


Movie poster from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1704573/

Lincoln

The road to the Oscars's starts here!  Lincoln was one of those movies that you walk away from thinking there is no way another film could beat it this awards season.

Lincoln follows Abraham Lincoln at the beginning of his second term and his struggle to end the civil war, pass the 13th Amendment abolishing slavery, and healing a broken nation.  In the months before his death he struggled with House Democrats who refused to sign anything saying slavery was an abonomation and an affront against God.  The House Democrats were also skeptical of the President negotiating with the south and how those negotiations with the south would be tainted by the passing of a bill outlawing something that seemed inherent in the traditions of the south.  The Republicans opposed the President negotiating with the south seeing as how they were rebels and not a separate nation to negotiate with.

The movie is more like an epic West Wing episode than the story of the Civil War or the assassination of the President.  The story follows Lincoln and his allies as they try to persuade opponents in the House to sign the 13th Amendment while also secretly planning a sit down with the leaders of the south to negotiate a truce.

Daniel Day Lewis, President Lincoln, delivers an outstanding performance.  While no one knows what Lincoln sounded like or how he walked or moved, Lewis portrays him exactly as you would think Lincoln would be.  Sally Field delivers a powerful performance of Mary Todd.  Most people do not think too much of her when they think of Lincoln, but she was an important partner and obstacle in his legacy and Field portrays her flaws and odd sense of love in an incredible way.  Tommy Lee Jones plays grumpy old Thaddeus Stevens who battles Lincoln at every turn and has earned the scorn of Mary Todd.  However when it comes to slavery, the two men see eye to eye and he works his "charm" to convince members of his party to defect with him and side with the President to abolish slavery.  Jones' performance ranks amongst his greatest ever.

Steven Spielbergs direction was impeccable as ever.  The movie came in at about 2 and a half hours but Spielberg keeps the story moving so well, you almost could sit there for another 2 hours.  The sets were outstanding, the cinematography breathtaking and playing an important role in building the enormity of the situation and time.

The only adverse feeling to this film I had was the ending.  While this will not spoil anything, of course Lincoln's story ends in his assassination.  There were several moments at the end of this film I think would have been incredible finales to an outstanding film.  I had hoped that the assassination would not be the ending since the film was not about his assassination or the hunt for the killer.  We had already seen that in The Conspirator.  While the assassination was handled nicely and did not ruin the movie, I felt like it detracted from what he had just accomplished and think the film would have been just as good if not even better leaving it with his political success rather than his assassination.

This movie should be an oscar sweep based on other possible nominations I have seen so far.  From Best Movie to Best Director, Best Actor, Best Supporting Actress, Best Supporting Actor, and many other artistic awards, we should see a big night for this film.  I highly recommend seeing this film and give it 5 stars.

Movie poster from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443272/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2

Twilight Breaking Dawn Part 2

The Twilight series finally concludes with Breaking Dawn Part 2.  This is one series I cannot understand how the 2nd movie ever got made, much less 4 more sequels.  My wife read the books and so I got suckered into seeing the first movie.  The first movie- Twilight- was quite possibly one of the worst mainstream films I have ever seen.  The story had a lot of potential but that potential was absolutely destroyed by a ridiculous director and horrendous acting.  Each movie since, I got excited when I saw the previews.  Each preview showed so much action and suspense but then every movie was a let down.  All the action was slammed into the 2 minute trailer and the rest of the movie still dealt with annoying teen angst and a weak vampire story really.  While each movie was progressively better than its predecessor, this series would need to really get to about 10 before you started really getting an audience past the readers of the Twilight series.

With all that negativity being said, I have to admit, Breaking Dawn Part 2 was pretty good.  The acting has become considerably better.  Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson have really improved and become much more natural and believable in their roles.  Kristen also finally seems to have learned to keep her mouth shut which was always so annoying in previous films.  The direction of the film was also much better and epic than previous films.

Most of the action was tightened into just the last 30 minutes of the film, but that was ok because the action was pretty incredible.  The action in the movie had finally lived up to the anticipation built by the trailers.  The final scene even departed slightly from the books ending so that fans of the novels were given a twist and spin, which I think is important.  As long as the twist does not change the story or the basics of the story, it is smart to keep the audience surprised and on their toes even if they have already read the ending.

While still leaving some to be desired from a vampire/werewolf movie, this was by far the best in the series and a pretty good film overall.  I give it 3.5 stars.  If you haven't suffered through the other films, I wouldn't recommend seeing this one- it won't make much sense.  Definitely check it out though as a nice ending to wasting those hours watching the first 4.  The epic battle should be seen on the big screen- it was impressive.

Movie poster from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1673434/

Skyfall

Skyfall is the 23rd official James Bond film in the series and it proves there are still opportunities to make amazing films, shock and thrill audiences, and make more money than any previous Bond film- even after 22 other films.

Skyfall has been the most critically acclaimed Bond film in recent memory- maybe since the Connery days.  While Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace were good, they had been such a sharp departure from the traditional Bond (or the one we had dealt with for the last 3 decades) some fans were still skeptical.  Skyfall puts fears to rest.  Daniel Craig has eased into this role with a charm that only a true James Bond could do.  While the first two Craig films were gritty and dark, this one begins to bring some of the Bond charm we had come to expect from previous Bonds.

The premise of Skyfall is that someone very powerful has obtained a list of all the undercover agents that NATO allies currently has in the field.  The leak of this information is embarrassing to Britain because they were not even supposed to have such a list of their allies activities.  The villain knows how MI-6 operates and is able to anticipate every move Bond and M make leading the obvious that this is an inside job.  Bond's investigation takes him all over the world (as usual) to Turkey, Shanghai, and Japan, but most of the film takes place in London and Scotland.  While most Bond movies pride themselves on how many locations they film at, Skyfall proves that bad guys are sometimes closer to home and that London and Scotland have just as many exotic locations as any other place in the world.

This film introduces Q for the first time since Craig took over as well as many other characters that have been seen in previous films.  Skyfall notes many famous previous Bond moments. I won't spoil anything in this review, but suffice to say- keep an eye out for all kind of hidden easter eggs and tongue in cheek jokes that relate to previous Bond movies.

I would agree with some out there that Skyfall can now be considered one of the best Bond films ever.  The modern take on James Bond makes it difficult to compare it to the charming, comedic Bond films like Goldfinger, Goldeneye, and other fan favorites.  I give this film 4.5 stars and highly recommend seeing it in theaters.  It will be hard to wait to see what happens in the next Bond film as Craig has two more in his contract before the Walter PPK is handed to another.

Movie poster from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1074638/

Argo

Argo is another movie based on a true story.  However unlike Flight, most of this movie is true.  Argo is the name of a fake movie the CIA created in Hollywood to shoot in Tehran, Iran.  The director, CIA Extraction Expert, Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck), travels to Tehran to scout for filming his sci-fi film.  At least that is his cover.  His real mission is to get six American embassy workers out of the country after the embassy was overrun by revolutionists.  These six escaped the embassy during the protests that ended with Iranians taking over the embassy and taking the remaining Americans hostage.  These six were taken in by the Canadian Ambassador and hid in his residence until they could be safely taken out.  The movie revolves around the CIA and American Intelligence community trying to determine the best way to get the Americans out safely.  Mendez's plan of creating a fake film is shot down until they determine that its the "best worst idea they have".  Ben Affleck's character teams up with John Goodman and Alan Arkin to start developing the movie and get it to a stage where he could legitimately head to Tehran as a Canadian filmaker and "meet" his other 6 pre-production crew members there.

While there is very little actual action in this film, it is filled with intensity.  Ben Affleck does a stellar job of directing while also delivering an excellent acting performance.  The supporting cast was quite large and talented as well.  As usual Alan Arkin and John Goodman do an incredible job and are quite believable as 70's Hollywood big shots.  Bryan Cranston also does a phenomenal job further cementing his ability to play both crazy meth drug dealer (Breaking Bad) and a convincing CIA operative.  He continues to showcase his acting talents and grown.  Everything was very timely- something I find very important in movies from certain time periods.  Everything from clothes, cars, planes, newspapers, everything was set firmly in that period around 1979.  The casting was spot on.  While Ben Affleck's character was slightly off- all the other people were spot on from their pictures.  At the end of the movie they do a photo match from the real people and the actors that portrayed them in the movie.

This was an incredible movie and one definitely to go see.  A terrific story that is not well known, amazing acting, and beautiful directing make this in my top 10 for the year.  I give it 4.5 stars.  While I am not sure this movie could win best film or actor, it very well has a shot at winning best director and best supporting actor- Goodman, Arkin, or Cranston.

Movie Poster from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1024648/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

Flight

I love movies that seem impossible but have "Based on true events" at the beginning of the film.  Like the Texas Chainsaw Massacre- how on earth is that based on true events.  Flight has the same effect.  It raises the question, is it even possible to turn a commercial airliner upside down and fly it so for several minutes?

Well for starters this story is loosely based on terrifying stories of drunk pilots who project sob stories while they put thousands of lives at risk.  The "true" part only refers to pilots who have flown drunk and a loose connection with one particular alcoholic pilot who fought his addiction after he was imprisoned for flying intoxicated.  The incredible flight at the beginning of the movie in which Denzel Washington turns the commercial airliner upside down to keep it from crashing out of the sky never happened.

The first 45 minutes of the film was incredible.  Denzel's character while flawed, does something so incredible you forget how bad of a person he is.  After saving almost everyone on board, Denzel goes into hiding and struggles to fight his alcoholism   Denzel Washington's performance was absolutely incredible.  Not surprising- its what we have come to expect from the talented actor.  His performances always leave you feeling strongly one way or another about his character.  John Goodman's character was also quite entertaining.  However about half way through the movie, Denzel's character takes a bad turn and the character reverts back to his drinking habits.  The movie at this point seems to drag a little.  The momentum really slows down and you are really just waiting for the ending.

There were some subtle faith aspects to this film which I also thought was interesting.  The overarching question seemed to be was the issue that brought down the plane an act of God, was it God that gave Denzel the power to do something no other pilot alive could have done- drunk or sober, or was it simply the fact that Denzel was a remarkable pilot?  It always seems to me that faith really is a strong factor in flight whether you pray before take off, pray as you crash to the ground, or ask why God would do such a thing after a horrific crash.

Overall the film was good.  Denzel definitely deserves a nod for an Oscar however there are other actors that beat him this time around (more on that soon!).  While the flight catastrophe was impressive on the big screen, I don't see any reason not to wait for dvd.  Its worth a watch if only for Washington's excellent performance.  I give the film overall 2.5 stars though.

Movie poster from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1907668/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

Halloween Movies!

Check out my Halloween movie page to the right side!  I review some of the Halloween movies I am watching this month and let you know what will have you sleeping with the lights on and what are just downright ridiculous and an affront to film making.  The reviews will be short by highlight some classics like Poltergeist, Halloween, Friday the 13th and more!



Movie poster from: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7leGWc6cXVYPpz2agZSiPNBHcy-BOChj-03OVE_Bzb6jaQ2YmnU9SNndyedN4B8YCgvHALB6h82zJCO7QehbC6CDYrU5xi6iwumjMOuWxJAEN1XF0b0EkQj12OMWZNAijRBgXQUZ09r5m/s1600/trick_r_treat_poster-425x578.jpg

Looper

Looper is currently being hailed by some as the time travel movie that redefines time travel movies.  Since opening last week it has taken over the #1 spot in the box office and has over a 90% ranking on  Rotten Tomatoes  But is it that good?

Looper does have an interesting and new take on time travel.  Jeff Daniels says it best, "This time travel crap, it fries your brain like an egg".  Very true.  Trying to understand a time travel movie and the mechanics and reality behind it is almost as exhausting as creating the world, rules, and consequences.  Really Rian Johnson probably deserves the most credit out of the whole cast and crew for being able to not only direct this movie, but also write a movie that, in my opinion, has very few holes and does a great job explaining the physics of a world where time travel is possible.  Rian Johnson really hasn't done anything else other than write and direct a little known movie, The Brothers Bloom, and direct a few episodes of Breaking Bad.  But this movie underscores his potential as both a writer and director.

Looper is about a future in which time travel has been invented but outlawed.  The most dangerous mobs in the future use it now to dispose of people they want dead.  Apparently in the future, murder is much more difficult to get away with due to an advanced tracking system.  So the mob sends the victim back to the past where they have an assassin, or Looper waiting to kill them.  Sometimes when the mob sees fit, they want to seperate themselves from their current Looper.  They do this by sending back the Looper's future self, and the Looper kills themself from the future, effectively closing the loop.  They are paid very well and then have the next 30 years to enjoy life before the mob kidnaps them, sends them back to the past and they get killed.  Confused?  Yeah, its a movie you have to see.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Joe, a top-notch Looper who one day is forced to close his loop when his future self appears as the target played by Bruce Willis.  Future Joe has come back on purpose to the past to change the past and prevent his loop from being closed.  The two then embark on a mission from opposite ends and different goals which is weird since they are the same person.

While the story was great and the action was good, my one flaw I felt the movie had was the makeup on Levitt. I feel like they used a lot of makeup and prosthetics to make him look more like Bruce Willis.  It was weird to kind of see a familiar face but then not.  I don't feel like any of the changes they made to Levitt's face really made him look more like Bruce Willis, other than contacts to change his eye color. And sometimes I felt like the makeup was harsher than other times. Another words it wasn't consistent the way he looked in every scene. I feel like they could have left that out and it would have been better.

Overall I really liked the movie.  I think it was great and different and entertaining.  I do not think it revolutionizes time travel movies though like Terminator, Bill and Ted's, 12 Monkeys, or Back to the Future did.  But I do think it was a fresh take and well done. I give the film 4 stars and definitely recommend taking a look at it in theaters.



Movie Poster from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1276104/

Lawless

Lawless is the true story of the Bondurant boys who were legends in the bootlegging business in Franklin County Virginia.  The story follows the three Bondurant brothers who could not be more different.  The leader of their group, Forrest Bondurant played by Tom Hardy, was a simple minded, brutal but quiet, businessman.  The middle brother, Howard played by Jason Clarke, was addicted to his own product- the crazy alcoholic.  And the youngest brother, Jack played by Shia Lebeouf is the dreamer that romanticizes everything about their lives but is harmless and shy's away from violence.

The story revolves around these three brothers trying to continue their illegal operation after a special deputy, Guy Pierce, shows up to take his share of all bootlegging operations or shut them down.  Forrest is the only bootlegger who stands up to this insanely violent government official.

This was a great movie with some great acting.  I think this continues to prove Tom Hardy can be Bane, an architect for dreams, or a 1920's bootlegger whose life becomes a legend.  Shia Lebouf also did very well.  Gary Oldman's character of Floyd Banner was great however he did not seem to play much of a role in the movie.  I was surprised that such a big actor would really only have 2 scenes that could have easily been edited out.

I also found it very interesting that the novel this movie was based on was written by Matt Bondurant, the grandson of Jack Bondurant.  It lent a sense or truth to the movie even in it's most outlandish scenes.  The movie was great and very entertaining, but be forewarned- extremely violent!  It's one of those movies that does not need to be so violent and at times it is very disturbing and difficult to watch.  While the movie was incredible, it does remind me of how movies used to simply put the idea of violence in our head and let our imagination go as far as we felt comfortable going.  That may sound weird but I feel like such extreme violence simply targets shock factor which takes away the incredible talent of the actors, writers, director, and the incredible story being told.

Overall I really liked Lawless and would definitely recommend seeing it.  It's one that doesn't need to be seen on the big screen but I would still recommend checking it out in theaters if you can.  Based on the story and acting I give the film 4 stars out of 5.




Movie poster from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1212450/

Total Recall (2012)

Colin Farrell, Jessica Alba, Kate Beckinsale, and Bryan Cranston all star in the new remake of Total Recall.  After watching the original 1990 version with Arnold Schwarzenegger, I have to say it does not stand the test of time.  What used to be a decent sci-fi flick is actually quite bad when watching it now.  The new Total Recall will probably have the same effect in 20 years.

The new Total Recall was very entertaining and action packed.  The story is similar but not exactly the same.  Colin Farrell plays a factory worker who is bored and unhappy with his life (even though married to the incredible Kate Beckinsale).  He goes to an underground place called Recall which implants memories into their clients brains so they can experience things they may have not been able to do in their real lives.  He chooses a super spy program with excitement, betrayal, and action.  However after the program, it becomes unclear to him whether he is still in the program or if he really was a spy before in his real life.

The one real surprise for me was how great Bryan Cranston was as the villain.  For me Cranston will always be associated with Malcolm in the Middle.  But after seeing his character here I am sold on him being a late comer to the big show.  For those of you already watching Breaking Bad, you know how great of an actor he can be.  I will definitely start watching this show now to see more of his brilliant work.

As I said the action and special effects were entertaining.  While this is certainly not the best movie of the summer, it was fun to watch.  Nothing was so big and over the top I would say you have to see it in theaters.  But when you are at home wanting to watch a good action flick, this definitely fits the bill.  I give this movie 3 stars out of 5.

The Bourne Legacy

The Bourne Legacy is the fourth installment in the Jason Bourne series and the first one replacing Matt Damon with Jeremy Renner.  Renner plays Aaron Cross, another, more advanced version of Jason Bourne that was a product of the Treadstone project.  As Edward Norton starts to shut down the entire program from the top to bottom, Renner and the scientist that developed the genetic enhancements on him, go on the run fighting to find out who was behind the shut down and find a way into hiding.

While all three of the Matt Damon Bourne movies were good, I really started seeing flaws in each one after the first one and really haven't thoroughly enjoyed one since the Bourne Identity.  The Bourne Legacy is an even further departure from the novels and while Aaron Cross is the main character, it is actually a cover name for Jason Bourne, not a totally different person as in the movie.

This movie had 3 major problems which made it by far the worst in the series.  1) The script.  The script  was not good and did not allow the audience to really witness impressing performances from the main acting team.  It further failed with too much technical jargon.  The story and entire "Bourne" process was totally changed and therefore needed way too much explanation for a 4th installment.  A lot of the explanation was incredibly scientific so that 99% of the audience seeing this movie probably did not understand any of the science behind this whole story.  I am not someone who thinks movies or scripts should be dumbed down for the audience but can indeed actually educate the audience.  But in this instance, we just needed an incredible action movie.

2) This was not an action movie.  There was action, but none of it overly impressive.  Matt Damon's character had some incredible fight scenes that just was incredible to watch.  This movie did not have anything overly impressive.  Some fight scenes were cool, but nothing fantastic.  Jeremy Renner was impressive as the character and did well.  But based on script and directing, he did not have the chance to really become "Bourne".  Even the final chase sequence was not overly exciting.

3) It seemed to really have an end.  Each of the other Bourne movies left the end open for a next installment.  While they all stood on their own and could have ended at any point, I felt that this one had a definite ending which kind of stops the story.

While this was not a good Bourne movie, it wasn't horrible- it just could have been a lot better.  I hope Universal does not stop with this 4th one as the final Bourne movie.  I feel like if they go back to the original story and build off that, it could continue as a lucrative franchise.  I give it 3 out of 5 stars.  I would recommend checking this out on DVD.  Its entertaining and if you enjoyed the first 3 Bourne movies, this will be entertaining as long as you realize, its only loosely a Bourne movie.

Drive

So I missed the boat on this movie.  Drive came out last year featuring Ryan Gosling, Bryan Cranston, Albert Brooks, and Ron Perlman.  When it came out, people went crazy over it and commented on how great of a movie it was.  Incredibly violent but in a very indie, quiet way.  While this was not the film that really launched Ryan Gosling's career (girls still oogle over him from The Notebook), but it was his first movie that solidified him as a interesting action hero that could act, kick butt, and look good.
As I said, I somehow missed this movie and while it has been on my list of movies to see, I just now got around to it.  It was not my favorite.  I think the hype definitely does not match the film.  The story revolves around a driver (Ryan Gosling- nameless) who is paid to be the getaway driver for thieves, robbers, and all around bad guys.  He befriends a woman next door whose husband gets sucked in for "one last job".  Ryan's character decides to help by being his getaway driver but through a web of deceit and double crossing gets caught up in a pretty sticky situation with some of the highest elite criminals.
The story was very unique but the film just seemed a little too independent.  There were times that the movie was so slow and I just lost interest.  I also did not find any of the actors all that likeable.  Even Ryan's character seemed very distant and one dimensional.  I did not feel involved in any of the character's development or problems.
Not a bad movie, but I had just been told to expect so much more.  Maybe this rare, bad review of the movie will allow others to enjoy it more than I did.  I give the movie 2.5 stars out of 5.  So many people talked about this movie which is why I watched it, but I definitely could have saved my time and watched something better.