Avengers: Age of Ultron (7/10): And the Build-up continues...

"I know you're good people. I know you mean well. But you just didn't think it through. There is only one path to peace... your extinction."

Age of Ultron doesn't live up to the first Avengers mostly because the novelty of seeing all these superheroes together has warn off, but it is still a very entertaining film with some positive elements to take out of it. First of all, the villain voiced by James Spader is an improvement over most others we've seen in the Marvel Universe. He is actually a menace to the heroes, and although Ultron isn't as charismatic as Loki, he still represents a much more dangerous threat for them so we feel there is much more at stake. The addition of Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch also enhances the franchise. Olsen is an actress I've admired ever since her screen debut in Martha Marcy May Marlene, so it was exciting to see her play this role alongside other fantastic actors. Aaron Taylor-Johnson's Quicksilver wasn't used as well as he was in X-Men, but it was still fun to see him on screen. Quicksilver was the highlight for me in the latest X-Men franchise, but here he is simply another new character. It was much more fun to see his quick movements in slow motion instead of at such a rapid pace. The returning characters also enhance the sequel and make it entertaining. Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man is by far my favorite character in the franchise and Mark Ruffalo's Hulk always delivers some of the best comedic moments. Age of Ultron delivers plenty of fun scenes, but it also tries to take itself a bit more seriously, and that didn't work as well for me considering I found Captain America The Winter Soldier to be a slightly better and interesting serious thriller. In summary, it doesn't match the comedy of its predecessor and it doesn't stand out as a more serious film either. The run-time does begin to feel a bit heavy, but I still have to admit that I had a fun time with the movie. There is a lot going on and with the addition of the new characters some of the scenes feel rushed and the plot gets a bit convoluted.

The main problem  with these Marvel movies is that they're getting more and more difficult to view as individual films. They seem to be always building up to something and I expected all the build-up in the previous films was going to lead to something important in this second Avengers movie, but what we get instead is more of a build-up to the next phase of the Marvel universe. Ultron presented a great threat to the heroes, but everything was rushed and it seems it was resolved all too easily by the end. It's still hard to resist a film with so many likable characters and charismatic leads, but I couldn't help but feel a bit disappointed with Age of Ultron when the introduction of the main villain seemed promising. Spader's voice work stood out for me in this film as one of the best performances. I was also happy to see Jeremy Renner get much more screen time with his character, Hawkeye, as well as Scarlett Johansson with Black Widow. This is probably as close to an individual film about them we'll get. Captain America and Thor however, are underused and I really didn't care too much about them here.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: Godzilla (8/10)

"The arrogance of men is thinking nature is in their control and not the other way around. Let them fight."

Godzilla is by far the best film of 2014 in the visual department thanks to some stunning special effects and beautiful cinematography. It is different from last year's Pacific Rim in that you get far less action scenes and much more teases. Some people had a problem with this, but I loved this approach from director Gareth Edwards allowing the tension to slowly build and not making this just one giant battle sequence after another. What didn't work for me in Pacific Rim, worked perfectly for me in Godzilla because I got exactly what I wanted. The human drama might have been weak, but it was enough to engage me and make me care for them as destruction was heading their way. Some may argue that a film about Godzilla should focus on the monster and not just have it on screen for a mere 10 minutes, but I disagree because without seeing him, his presence is felt throughout the film. We may not have gotten the full scale monster that we were expecting at the beginning, but the way Edwards teased the audience by showing just small parts of Godzilla or the path of destruction it left behind was enough to engage me and leave me wanting more. By doing so, Edwards kept the audience engaged and slowly built some memorable and gripping climactic scenes towards the end. It is what other great films like Jaws, Jurassic Park, or even Alien have done, and Edwards inspired by them borrowed those elements and directed a remarkable blockbuster film. If you thought that Godzilla should be on screen for almost the entirety of the film in order for it to be the true star, than you were mistaken because even though it isn't on screen much, its psychological presence is felt throughout the film turning it into the real star. This argument reminded me of Hitchcock's Rebecca which was a film that centered on the title character without ever showing her once on screen, but her presence dominated every single scene just like Godzilla does here. Godzilla's presence is felt throughout the entire movie and that is what distinguishes this film from Roland Emmerich's 1998 version which may have had more monster on screen, but with disastrous results.

Ever since Ishiro Honda directed the original 1954 film, Godzilla has remained the king of all monsters in cinema. After an impressive debut in 2010 with his small indie film, Monsters, director Gareth Edwards was given a much bigger monster to work with. With a larger budget and an all-star cast, Edwards had a heavy load on his shoulders, but he delivered. The screenplay co-written by Max Borenstein and Dave Callaham may be the weakest link in the film, but it works nonetheless. The film opens by introducing us to Joe Brody (Bryan Cranston) who is responsible for the security at a Japanese reactor plant. His wife, Sandra (Juliette Binoche) also works at the plant and their young son, Ford (CJ Adams) studies at a nearby school. Joe has been picking up some strange signals after a series of quakes had affected the region, but his officials refuse to allow him to shut down the plant. What appears to be a big earthquake ends up destroying the plant and Joe is forced to shut it down leaving his wife and hundreds of workers underground contaminated by the nuclear reactor's leak. Fifteen years later we see Ford (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) all grown up returning to San Francisco from his military service to his wife, Elle (Elizabeth Olsen) and his young son, Sam (Carson Bolde). Elle receives a call from Japan that night, and it's the police who claim to have arrested Joe for invading private property. Ford has to travel to Japan to bail his father out of jail and convince him to come back home with him, but what they end up discovering there will change their lives forever.

I really enjoyed the performance from Bryan Cranston (after the success of Breaking Bad, I don't think there is anyone who doesn't like this guy) and I thought he gave the film a powerful dramatic narrative. Aaron Taylor-Johnson may not have what it takes for the lead role, but he delivered. The best dramatic moments took place during the beginning of the film and they were enough to keep me interested in what was going on. I really thought Elizabeth Olsen, Sally Hawkins, Juliette Binoche, David Strathairn, and Ken Watanabe were all underused. They are all talented actors and should have been given stronger characters, but they all felt like cardboard cutout characters. Watanabe's character especially didn't seem to serve no other purpose in the film than to inform the audience and explain what was going on. The human drama along with the screenplay didn't work as well, but the spectacular visuals and great action scenes carried this film a long way. The score by Alexandre Desplat is also spectacular and helped set the tone of the film. The final 15 minutes of the film are gripping and there are also several memorable scenes like the one that takes place in Hawaii or the HALO parachute jump scene. I'm not one usually blown away by CGI, but this time I was really impressed with Godzilla. This isn't a perfect film, it has many flaws, but it works way better than other recent disaster or monster related films.

My Review: Kick Ass 2 (5/10)

"I try to have fun. Otherwise, what's the point?"

Let me begin by stating that I was a huge fan of the first film which ended up being one of my top ten movies of 2010. It was very entertaining and introduced me to Chloe Grace Moretz whom I absolutely love. My high expectations for this sequel were tampered down a bit due to the bad critical reception it received, but I still thought I was going to like it based on how much I loved these characters. However despite being entertained during several moments, I still felt this sequel was a huge disappointment due to the fact that it had serious issues with the overall tone of the film. It never quite captures the spirit of the first film which did manage to balance the ultra violent action scenes with funny moments. Here the sequel suffers from a lower quality script which never manages to be as witty as the first film. There were several scenes that felt forced and didn't work. One of the key differences with the first film is that director Matthew Vaughn turned in this sequel to Jeff Wadlow who doesn't have as much experience and isn't as good as a writer as Vaughn. Having got that out of the way, I still have to admit I had a fun time with Moretz's character and enjoyed her scenes as Hit Girl. She makes this film tolerable, despite the fact that they almost messed everything up when they tried to focus on her character's adaptation to High School. That was the weakest part of the film as Moretz was playing way out of character here and this felt like a bad version of Mean Girls at times. The jokes were predictable and forced in that scenario. When the film focused more on the action I thought the story improved a little, but there are too many weak moments in Kick Ass 2 for me to give it a passing grade. The film isn't for everyone, and unless you absolutely enjoyed the first one like I did, than I wouldn't recommend you this sequel. 

This sequel continues to follow Dave (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) as he has inspired several other ordinary people to become superheroes. Dave has been feeling a bit lonely and decides to ask Mindy (Chloe Grace Moretz) to team up with him as they continue defending the city. Mindy is reluctant at first, but she decides to team up with Kick-Ass and begins to train him. After an incident, Mindy who is now in the care of her foster parent, Detective Marcus (Morris Chestnut), is forced to abandon her vigilante dreams and try to live an ordinary life. She promises Marcus that she will stay away from the vigilante life and try to adapt to her normal life as a High School student. Being on his own once again, Dave decides to join forces with several of the superheroes he has inspired. Colonel Stars and Stripes (Jim Carrey), a former gangster and now a born again Christian, has been leading a patrol group of masked crusaders known as Justice Forever, and they are glad to have Kick Ass join them. As things begin to go smoothly for these superheroes, a new villain shows up claiming to want to kill Kick-Ass. The villain is none other than Chris D'Amico (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) who wants to avenge his father's death. He has assembled a group of villains to destroy the city and begin terrorizing the members of Justice Forever. A final face off between them seems inevitable, and not all will survive.

Other than Chloe Grace Moretz's character the rest seem to be underdeveloped. She is the only one carrying most of the film on her shoulders, but when the writers decide to strip her off of her uniform the film falls flat. It's those shifts of tonality that the film takes at times that end up burying this otherwise entertaining flick. The secondary characters don't do much here either, with the exception of Jim Carrey's Colonel Stars who gives a solid performance. He doesn't get enough screen time, but he stands out in the few scenes he's in. Nicolas Cage is really missed here as his performance in the first film was perhaps his last greatest one. He hasn't done much since. The film could have used a little more of Hit Girl and less of Mindy, but I agree with the fact that having a 15 year old vigilante isn't as shocking as it was when she was younger during the first film. I still enjoyed her performance and think she has a great future ahead of her (I loved her in Let the Right One In and Hugo as well). However I did find most of the villains really obnoxious here. They were another weak part of this sequel. Neither Christopher Mintz-Plasse nor Olga Kurkulina brought anything to the table and their characters were dumbed down. The film never quite finds its identity and at times it sends mixed and opposite messages about violence and society. 

My Review: Anna Karenina (7/10)

¨Anna isn’t a criminal, but she broke the rules! ¨

After the success Joe Wright had last year with his thriller Hannah, he now returns to doing what made him famous: adapting well known romantic period pieces. His collaboration with Keira Knightley in Pride and Prejudice put him in the map. They teamed up again for Atonement with equal success, and now they got together for the third time for the adaptation of Leo Tolstoy´s famous novel. They say that the third time is the charm, but I found this to be their weakest collaboration together despite its four Oscar nominations (Cinematography, Costume Design, Original Score, and Production Design). Wright has had success in the past with these period pieces always receiving nominations for his work in the technical department. This film is a triumph visually with a great production and costume design representing 19^th century Imperialistic Russia. The performances are pretty much alright but no one really stands out here. The film is shot in an experimental way as the narrative seems to be taking place in a theater where actors come in and out of different sets through the stage. It strikes you odd at first, but later you get used to this approach which in a way works because the characters in this story are viewed through a lens in society in a similar way as we view actors performing plays on stage. It was an interesting and original way to make the film in my opinion, but I don’t know if it worked for everyone. The main issue I had with this film is that it was so focused on the beautiful exterior designs that the narrative and characters seemed to lack depth and humanity. Several issues were left out of Tolstoy´s novel, but it’s understandable considering Wright put more emphasis on the relationships than on socio-political ideologies.

The story is set in Imperialistic Russia during the late 19^th century focusing on aristocratic families. Anna Karenina (Keira Knightley), an aristocrat who is married to a senior government official named Alexei Karenin (Jude Law) who is twenty years older than her, decides to travel from St. Petersburg to Moscow to visit her brother, Stiva (Matthew MacFadyen) and convince his wife Dolly (Kelly Macdonald) to forgive him for being unfaithful to her in order to calm the turmoil that his affair stirred up in Moscow society. Stiva is a womanizer, but Anna convinces Dolly to forgive him and stay with him. Dolly´s beautiful sister, Princess Kitty (Alicia Vikander), invites Anna to a ball where she expects Vronsky (Aaron Johnson), a cavalry officer to propose to her. In the meantime a childhood friend of Stiva´s, Levin (Domhnall Gleeson) a passionate but shy landowner who lives in the country, has come to propose to Kitty as well. Kitty is in love with Vronsky so she politely refuses to marry Levin and he returns to the countryside. During the ball, Vronsky and Anna seem to instantly feel attracted towards each other and Vronsky completely ignores Kitty by choosing Anna as his dance partner instead of her. This is when Kitty realizes that Vronsky has never been in love with her, and Anna having such a strong attraction for Vronsky decides to return home to her husband and son before more damage is done. This is just the beginning for Anna´s moral troubles as, Vronsky takes the same train back to Petersburg and confesses his love to her. The two soon share a passionate affair, which Russian society will not forgive.

It must be hard to adapt what is considered to be one of the best novels of all time into a screenplay; and that difficult task was left to Tom Stoppard (Shakespeare in Love). I think that several elements from the novel didn’t translate very well, especially if the viewer wasn’t familiar with the novel. However the story is still so rich and powerful that the film works, although the characters don’t have enough depth as in the novel. Despite the difficulty in adapting the novel I feel the movie did succeed in some ways and makes this film worth the watch. Fans of period pieces will be delighted with the exquisite attention to the costume and production designs. They will also fall for this love affair, a story that has transcended time and space. Despite living in a very different society now, I feel that through paparazzi and gossip magazines we still kind of remain obsessed and judgmental towards Hollywood stars private lives in a similar way as ancient societies gossiped about aristocratic life. I do have to admit that as beautiful as the film might look, it does feel like it is missing a beat to it and will leave you a bit indifferent towards the end.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: Savages (8/10)

¨It started here in paradise, Laguna Beach, where they say God parked himself on the seventh day, but they towed him on the eighth.¨

When the movie began I thought I was actually watching a trailer for another Hostel movie or something like that, but once I realized that it was actually the opening of Oliver Stone`s new film I knew I was going to be in for something different. I knew the film would be much darker than his latest efforts going back to his Natural Born Killers days and I was excited about it. Then I heard Blake Lively`s voice over narration and it kind of killed the momentum. Despite the fact that there was no need for the narration and some other minor issues, I really enjoyed this film for the most part. I don’t think I was so hooked with a thriller like this one all year. I was literally at the edge of my seat once the boring setup was over with. The two biggest issues I had with this film had to do with the beginning and the ending, but for most of Savages I was really entertained and hooked. There are some great performances here as well, although they had to do more with the secondary characters than the main ones. Savages could have been one of my favorite films of the year if it weren’t for those issues I had. The film is really violent and difficult to watch at times, but if you like these kinds of thrillers then you will enjoy this movie. Oliver Stone made a name for himself way back in 1979 when he won an Oscar for the adaptation of Midnight Express, and followed such success by directing films like Platoon, Nixon, Wall Street, Born on the Fourth of July, JFK, and Any Given Sunday. He`s done very diverse projects, but Savages is perhaps one of his most violent and darkest films to date, at least from this century. It will stick with you long after the movie is over.

Ophelia (Blake Lively), -who actually calls herself O after realizing she was named after the suicidal character from Hamlet- lives an ideal life in Laguna Beach along with her two lovers, Chon (Taylor Kitsch) a former Navy SEAL, and Ben (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) a bright marihuana producer and entrepreneur. Ben and Chon have been best friends since High School and have no problem sharing their love with O. The two friends are very different from each other; Ben is peaceful while Chon who has been affected by war in Iraq is more of a violent person. The two have had success with their marihuana business since the weed that they produce is one of the best in the world. They run things as peacefully as possible, but when a Mexican drug cartel wants to become partners with them, things begin to get out of hand. The cartel is run by la Reina Elena (Salma Hayek), and Lado (Benicio del Toro) is in charge of doing the dirty work. When Elena tries to force the two men to associate with her through Alex (Demian Bichir) and they refuse, she sends O to be kidnapped. Ben and Chon will do whatever it takes to get the love of their lives back, while fighting off this dangerous cartel. A dirty FBI agent named Dennis (John Travolta) assists the Californian duo by providing some key information of the cartel. This is where things begin to get ugly and the violence escalates.

Taylor Kitsch has had a very busy year with John Carter coming out earlier this year and then Battleship. I don’t think he`s a very good actor, but this is perhaps his better work. I really didn’t know who Aaron Taylor-Johnson was until I heard he was the guy from Kick-Ass. He is unrecognizable in this film, and of the three leading actors, he´s by far the best. I thought he gave a strong performance here, although in my opinion the best performances come from the secondary actors. Salma Hayek and John Travolta were great and remind us once again why they have been such successful actors over the years. My favorite performance came from Benicio del Toro who I thought was brilliant and one of the best villains of the year. The story is really gripping and intense; if it weren`t for the narration or the pretty loose ending than this would´ve been a perfect movie. It`s still worth your time and you won`t regret Savages if you enjoy suspenseful thrillers and don`t mind a little bit of violence. It`s not a perfect movie, but I recommend it for the suspense and tension that Stone creates in this noir pulpy film.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com