My Review: White House Down (6/10)

"My father is a very special man."

White House Down might suffer from a terrible plot and loud action scenes we've seen a million times before, but the leads have such great chemistry together that this movie was actually entertaining. I'm giving Roland Emmerich a passing grade for the first time since his 2000 film The Patriot. I've disliked pretty much every film he's made since (2012, The Day After Tomorrow, and 10,000 BC), but for the first time Emmerich barely redeems himself thanks to strong performances from Foxx and Tatum. This is the second film coming out this year about the White House being under siege where the president is taken hostage and one man has to save the day. Olympus Has Fallen starred Gerard Butler and Aaron Eckhart. The action sequences in that film might have been a little better than White House Down, but I didn't like that movie because it took itself too seriously despite the ridiculous plot. What Emmerich has going for him here is that he knows the film is silly and that everything is pretty much formulaic, but he has fun with the story. He lets these two lead roles play with cliches and simply entertain the audience with their over the top performances. In a way this film felt a lot like Independence Day and those 90 films I enjoyed so much. It's not a Die Hard film, but it does pretty much live up to films like Air Force One and has a little more fun with the familiar story. We know pretty much everything that's going to happen in this film; it is very predictable, but somehow it manages to have fun with everything and never tries to takes itself seriously. Tatum has such great comedic timing that he really steals the show here. This is a summer popcorn film that is loaded with entertaining and funny scenes, but has very little depth to it. Unfortunately the film is way too long and has a preposterous final act. Despite it all, I still enjoyed White House Down and had a decent time.

Former military, John Cale (Channing Tatum), works as a Capitol policeman but thanks to a contact he gets a job interview with the Secret Service for the President James Sawyer (Jamie Foxx). He doesn't get the job, but he takes advantage of his interview to take his young daughter Emily (Joey King) on a tour through the White House. She is a huge admirer of the President and is having her dream day, but all of a sudden the place is attacked by a group of heavily armed paramilitary men who take everyone hostage. The head of the president's security, Walker (James Wood), is behind the attack. John prevents Walker from taking him hostage and hides out with the President inside while finding a way to escape and at the same time rescue his daughter from the dangerous paramilitary group led by Stenz (Jason Clarke). Cale gets through with the Pentagon from the inside and is permanently in communication with Finnerty (Maggie Gyllenhaal) who tries to guide him and the President to safety. Cale and the President will have to team up in order to disrupt Walker's destructive plan. Among the talented cast we have supporting works from Richard Jenkins, Nicolas Wright, and Peter Jacobson.

I don't blame those who didn't like White House Down because I can see why they hated it. The premise is really silly and the movie is way too long with a very ridiculous final act. I enjoyed the film mostly because the actors seemed to be taking their roles very lightly and having fun with the material given. Channing Tatum and Jamie Foxx worked extremely well together and shared some very funny scenes. Their chemistry is what made this film worthwhile for me. The film isn't as good as Die Hard, but I thought it took a similar approach and that is what worked for Emmerich this time. Tatum is a bankable actor and has been on a role lately (21 Jump Street and Magic Mike). The film is worth watching for this alone, just don't go into this film expecting an intelligent action film.

My Review: Jack Reacher (8/10)

¨There´s this guy, he´s a kind of cop, at least he used to be. He doesn’t care about proof, he doesn’t care about the law, he only cares about what´s right. He knows what I did. You can´t protect me. No one can.¨

Jack Reacher was one of those films I went into with very low expectations, but came out pleasantly surprised with how entertaining the movie really was. Tom Cruise isn’t one of my favorite actors, but I can honestly say that I prefer his mysterious, quiet, low key approach much more than his eccentric and talkative characters (like in Knight and Day). There is no denying his on screen charisma and he really doesn’t have to do much in order for you to root for him and that is why I find his quieter performances much more thrilling and engaging. Jack Reacher has it all: it´s action packed, it has thrills, mysteries, twists, and even some comedy. I was entertained much more than I thought I would be with this Tom Cruise vehicle. The screenplay was adapted by Academy Award winner, Christopher McQuarrie (The Usual Suspects) from Lee Child´s book One Shot. Although McQuarrie is known mostly for his work with screenplays, this is his second film as a director (the first being The Way of the Gun) and he does a great job with the action scenes here. I am not a big fan of car chases, I get tired of them very easily, but this film has one of the best vehicle chases I´ve seen since Ronin. The opening scene with the sniper point of view was also pretty gripping and inventive. I was really glad I got to see this film despite it not being groundbreaking or anything because it was entertaining. This mystery thriller worked really well thanks to some great comedic moments.

Jack Reacher (Tom Cruise) is a former military operative who has been living off the radar in the past year like a John Doe. He is the kind of person who can´t be found, but rather he finds you. The movie begins with a deadly sniper shooting five innocent victims in the middle of the city. The police identify the alleged murderer as Barr (Joseph Sikora), a former military officer who claims to be innocent. Detective Emerson (David Oyelowo) has a strong case against him, but all Barr says is ¨Get Jack Reacher.¨ Neither Emerson nor District Attorney Rodin (Richard Jenkins) know how to reach Reacher, but he shows up after hearing the news. He begins investigating the case after the defense attorney, Helen (Rosamund Pike), convinces him to look into the supposedly locked case. She believes like everyone else that Barr is guilty, but wants to save him from the death penalty. When Jack Reacher begins to investigate the case he finds some evidence that leads him to believe that Barr is innocent and that someone had a specific target in mind and wanted to make everything look like a random killing. While Jack begins digging deeper some men begin to follow him and try to scare him off, but Reacher is the sort of guy who always gets to the bottom of things.  

Tom Cruise may have found yet another franchise in Jack Reacher as his character is very likeable by remaining very quiet, mysterious, calm, but at the same time very tough. He is the sort of guy who seems to always be in control and in cool. There are also some very interesting performances here from Robert Duvall, Alexia Fast, Jai Courtney, and the great director Werner Herzog who have a supporting role. Duvall brings some comedic relief and has great chemistry with Cruise, while Herzog and Courtney create some interesting villains. The film runs a bit long and there is some problem with the pacing of the film at times, but the great action scenes make up for it. Jack Reacher has some very smart one liners and always answers with some sort of quick remark, which were the comedic highlight of the film. There is a bathroom scene that feels a bit off from the rest of the movie, and the action here is sort of cartoonish but it was also another one of the funniest moments of the film. Despite not being a huge Tom Cruise fan I really did enjoy this film and recommend it.  

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: Killing Them Softly (5/10)

¨This guy wants to tell me we're living in a community? Don't make me laugh. I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.¨

Killing Them Softly is Andrew Dominik’s latest film which was nominated for the Palme d’Or in last year’s Cannes film festival. I really had high expectations for this film, but was disappointed with this noir action film. The entire film was a political allegory, but I really didn’t enjoy it all, and felt the political messages were a little too heavy and tiring. The highlight of Killing Them Softly was Brad Pitt’s performance, but in the first half of the film he gets very little screen time. This is the second time that Pitt works with Dominik after having worked with him in the critically acclaimed The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. That film was more beautifully shot in my opinion, but of course this being a sort of noir film the cinematography was much dirtier. It was shot using Kodak’s 500T 5230 film stock which gave the film a much darker and grayish tone to help set the mood of the story. Killing Them Softly was loosely based on George V. Higgins novel, Cogan’s Trade, and adapted for the screen by Dominik himself. The film has a lot of dialogues going on and little action, which isn’t exactly a problem for me considering I enjoy Tarantino films, but the dialogues in this movie were just not that entertaining, and the characters weren’t really memorable. Dominik was forcefully giving the film a political message and it was just too heavy handed for my taste, but I know many people enjoyed it so I can’t say Dominik failed. I’m simply not into political movies so I didn’t appreciate this very much. If you enjoy politics then you might appreciate the political allegory behind this action thriller, which in my opinion didn’t add anything new to the genre. It was very predictable.

Johnny Amato (Vincent Curatola) hires two amateur criminals, Frankie (Scoot McNairy) and Russell (Ben Mendelsohn) to perform a heist at a Mob poker ring operating in New Orleans. Markie (Ray Liotta) is the proprietor of the place, and when the two amateurs rob him, the mafia blames Markie for the heist since he has had a similar history in the past and the local criminal economy has collapsed. The mafia’s messenger is played by Richard Jenkins who we only know as the driver. He hires a hitman named Jackie Cogan (Brad Pitt) to kill everyone responsible for the heist in order for balance to be restored amongst the mob world. While all these situations are taking place we have several voiceovers playing in the background (television or radio ads) with political messages from Bush and Obama, in order to make sure the viewer understands the political allegory that is taking place here. The plot is pretty simple and not much happens between each dialogue that is taking place. James Gandolfini also has a funny role in this film as an alcoholic hitman.

The true star of the film is Brad Pitt who delivers each line in a very cool way without overdoing himself or going overboard with his character. He seems like a man who is in control. In one of his speeches he mentions how he doesn’t like it when his victims get all touchy and feely about being killed so he prefers killing them softly from a distance, thus the title for the film. That line and the last one he shares with the driver are perhaps the best scenes in this movie. I also have to say that Scoot McNairy gave a pretty good performance in the supporting role. He really seems like the main character of the film during the first half and he gives a solid performance. I really wasn’t familiar with his work although I do realize he was in Argo, but had very little screen time there. Overall I really was disappointed with this film and felt it didn’t present anything new to the neo-noir genre. There were few action scenes, but I really didn’t care much for the characters so I wasn’t immersed into this world that Dominik was trying to suck us into.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: Liberal Arts (6/10)

¨I was English... with a minor in history. Just to make sure I was fully unemployable.¨

Liberal Arts is Josh Radnor´s (How I Met Your Mother) second film as a director following his 2010 film Happythankyoumoreplease in which he also wrote the screenplay and starred in. Josh Radnor is a very funny actor, but in this film he takes a bit more of a dramatic approach. I really prefer him in the funny role, although he didn’t do a bad job here. He was just one of those characters who likes to over think things sometimes and have intellectual dialogues with his friends. He also seems to have that puppy face that makes the viewer want to feel sorry for him. I really didn’t enjoy his character as much as I did Elizabeth Olsen´s.  Olsen, who was brilliant in Martha Marcy May Marlene, plays a very likeable character here as a sophomore student in a Liberal Arts college. She seems very intellectual and really played her part perfectly. Liberal Arts is one of those films that depends almost entirely on the screenplay and the chemistry between the actors. It was a sort of nostalgic film with some romantic moments. I thought the film was a bit too talkative and tried a little too hard to make the characters overly intellectual. Some dialogues seemed a bit forced to me, but I won´t complain because I was entertained by Elizabeth Olsen´s performance. This was a very divisive film for critics, some tended to hate it while others enjoyed the intellectual side of it. I on the other hand found it pleasing enough to watch, but not as enjoyable to recommend for all viewers. See this if you are a fan of the actors or enjoy intellectual romantic dramas.

Jesse (Josh Radnor) is a former English student who had high dreams of becoming a romantic poet, but has had to settle for a job in college admissions which he doesn’t really enjoy. He´s in his mid 30´s, and when he receives a call from Prof. Peter Hoberg (Richard Jenkins), his former English college professor, about visiting his former college for his retirement dinner he decides to go visit his alma matter. Once there, in Ohio, he meets with his Professor with whom he has remained close friends and meets one of the students there named Zibby (Elizabeth Olsen). He immediately feels a connection with her as they discuss several issues which remind him of his college days as a student. He keeps in touch with her through old fashioned letters when he goes back to his hometown. Both begin to feel an emotional connection, but Jesse feels like he is too old for her. After a few months Zibby asks him to visit him again and he does. Once they are together he begins to feel more attracted to her, but at the same time he feels weird because of the age difference. The film moves from here as the two deal with their feelings for each other, while there are some other minor side stories with some secondary characters.

The film works as sort of a psychological study between two very different characters. One is a 35 year old who is unsatisfied with what he has achieved in his life, while the other one is a young student full of hope for the bright future ahead of her. Zibby sees in Jesse that 35 year old intellectual with whom she can have serious conversations about life and opera music, while Jesse is reminded of his young former self when he speaks to her. Both share great chemistry, but you can also feel the tension and weirdness that Jesse feels each time he has to meet with her in public. I really enjoyed the first half of this film, but was a little disappointed with the resolution. I still enjoyed the film in the most part and had a good time. Richard Jenkins is always great in his secondary roles, although here he plays a more serious and depressive role, while Zach Efron has a couple of very funny scenes here as well. The film might be worth a rental for some, but don´t get your hopes up this is an average film after all.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: The Cabin in the Woods (7/10)

¨They have to choose what happens in the cellar. Yeah, we write the game as much as we have to but in the end, if they don't transgress they can't be punished. ¨

I`m not big on horror films since I generally consider them to be very predictable and cliché. I can’t remember what the last horror slasher movie I enjoyed was since the few I do enjoy have to do more with psychological scares. All these movies are the same, but to my surprise it wasn’t the case with Cabin in the Woods. I had no idea what direction this movie was moving towards and despite not being a fan of the genre I was able to appreciate Cabin in the Woods thanks to the unpredictability of it and some interesting performances. The less you know about this film before watching it the better. Like the tagline of the movie suggests, this film works as sort of a satire of all the slasher films we`ve grown up with. ¨If something is chasing you…split up, ¨ is one of the taglines that is so cliché about these movies and it`s addressed in this film as well. There are several elements that are sort of dissected in this movie and analyzed through satire and that`s what I enjoyed the most about Cabin in the Woods. I didn’t care for the scares (which aren't here) or the gore, what I really liked was that this film was making fun of the genre while at the same time paying homage to it so that fanboys would also enjoy it. It works almost in the same way that Scream did in the late 90`s by making fun of the stereotypes of the genre. This film has an ending every fanboy will enjoy. It was a little too much for me since I`m not a big fan of the genre, but I still have to admit I was really surprised by this film. It is definitely one of the best horror movies I`ve seen in a very long time.

Despite the fact that the trailers give away a lot of the movie I will only give away the basic part. You have the five typical teenagers you see in most horror films decide to go spend a weekend at an old and mysterious cabin in the woods: the jock, Curt (Chris Hemsworth), the slut, Jules (Anna Hutchison), the stoner, Marty (Fran Kranz), the nerd, Holden (Jesse Williams), and the virgin, Dana (Kristen Connolly). The five play characters we are all familiar with in this genre. On their way to the woods they even run into an old gas station with a weird owner named Mordecai (Tim de Zarn) who really only lacks a sign in front of his forehead saying ¨Do not go into the woods if you want to live.¨ Once the teens arrive at the beautiful place they begin to party as they usually do, but later strange things begin to happen and they realize that they might not be alone in that place. You probably have seen this scenario a million times before in these films, but it takes a totally different turn and if you`re a fan of the genre you will be in for a treat. Character actors Richard Jenkins and Bradley Whitford also give some strong secondary performances as they usually do.

Cabin in the Woods combines a lot of gore with laughs. I can`t say scares because there is hardly any. I like the way the film poked fun of its usual stereotypes and played with them while at the same time paying homage to several classic horror films. This was Drew Goddard`s first film as a director and he really delivers. He had the credentials necessary considering he wrote and produced several Buffy, Angel, and Lost episodes as well as Cloverfield. He also co-wrote this brilliant and bizarre script with Joss Whedon, one of the best screenwriters in Hollywood (The Avengers, Toy Story, and Serenity). The script is smart although I must say that it was bizarre as well, but in a good way. Fans will have a terrific time with this movie, and those of us who criticize most slasher films for their predictability will be surprised by the twists taken here. It is a very original film which isn’t afraid of taking risks or making fun of itself. The highlight of the film for me was Fran Kranz`s performance. Most of the characters in this movie were really likeable, as opposed to most horror films where they are hateful and forgettable. Cabin in the Woods is a very interesting and unique film.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com

My Review: Let Me In (8/10)

¨Do you think there`s such a thing as evil? ¨

Many viewers might consider Let Me In as one of the best films of the year because it is such a great horror-romantic film, but that`s only because they probably haven`t seen the original Swedish version entitled Lat den ratte Komma (Let the Right One In) directed by Tomas Alfredson back in 2008. Both these films are based on the novel of the same name written by Ajvide Lindqvist. The original Swedish film is just breathtaking and an absolutely brilliant film which I didn`t think needed to be remade. It is one of the best horror movies of the decade and without a doubt the best vampire film. When I heard it was going to be remade I was a little disappointed, but I still wanted to see how they went about it. Let Me In is actually a decent remake, but not nearly as great as the original. If you haven`t seen either of these films then I recommend you watching the original one, but if you don`t like having to read subtitles then I guess the American version is worth your time. The story is so powerful that it works in both these films, but of course I already knew what was going to happen so I wasn`t all that blown away by this film as I had been with the original one. Lindqvist actually collaborated with the screenplay of the original film while Matt Reeves adapted the screenplay for the American version. Matt Reeves (known for his direction and collaboration with J.J. Abrams in Cloverfield) directs this film by trying to stay as true as possible to the original film. Many of the scenes are similar in both films and the storyline is pretty much the same with a few minor changes.

As for the plot goes the names of the main characters have been changed. Eli is now Abby (played by Chloe Moretz) and Oskar is Owen (Kodi Smit-McPhee). The story which took place in a Swedish suburb now takes place in New Mexico. Owen is a twelve year old kid who spends a lot of time alone in his house due to the fact that his parents are getting a divorce. He talks to himself a lot and dreams of getting revenge on the kids who bully him at school (who instead of tormenting him to squeal like a pig like they did in the original film, in Let Me In they torment him with telling him to cry like a girl). Owen plays with his knife imagining he is fighting off Kenny (Dylan Minnette), the bully from school, by stabbing a tree and repeating the words cry like a girl. One night in his quiet neighborhood a twelve year old girl moves in to the apartment next door along with who seems to be his father. The girl is Abby (Chloe Moretz) and the guardian`s name is never mentioned (played by Richard Jenkins). We soon find out that Abby is not your normal girl, her guardian actually is a serial killer who drains the blood of his victims in order to feed Abby. The problem is that Jenkins`s character is getting old and sloppy and he is a bit unsuccessful in his few tries. The police officer who is investigating the murders is played by Elias Koteas. We aren`t given his name either, because the central theme of the film revolves around Owen and Abby`s friendship. They somehow discover that they need each other despite their differences.

This film works because it stays true to the original story and central theme of the novel dealing with the bond that Owen and Abby form. It is such a powerful story that raises questions about love, friendship, and morality. Owen loves Abby, but is she evil? That is a question he will have to find an answer to himself. I loved the two kid actors in the Swedish version, and the two American actors are equally as good. Chloe Moretz is just fantastic as Abby. She makes us fall in love with her despite the fact that she is a bloodsucking vampire. There seems to be a sadness and innocence in her face that also captivates Owen. It has been a great year for Chloe as an actress. She was also so good in Kick-Ass one of the most entertaining films of the year. These two roles are very different from each other and Chloe Moretz has proven she belongs in Hollywood. What I really didn`t enjoy as much as the original film was the cinematography. The Swedish film was beautifully shot by Hoyte Van Hoytema (who recently worked in The Fighter) and the scenery was just spectacular. I remember being awed by the white snow contrasting with the dark red blood, especially in the first murder scene. In Let Me In the cinematography (Greg Fraser) just wasn`t as breathtaking. I still think this is a decent remake, but I have to stick with the original. The story just moved and shocked me at the same time, but I already knew what I was getting into in this film so it wasn`t as surprising. If you haven`t seen any of these two movies, see the original Swedish film first, but if you don`t like subtitles Let Me In isn`t a bad choice either.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/