Let me start by saying: Adrift is a powerful movie. It will stay with you long after it is over. I was completely surprised by how moved I felt at the end and how many emotions it raised in me.
Adrift is the story of Tami and Richard, who met while sailing in the South Pacific, as they sail a friend's boat across the Pacific Ocean. There is a massive storm (Hurricane Raymond) they try to avoid but are unsuccessful. The ship is damaged, the mast broken and the sail torn; they are adrift.
This will be a shorter review because I won't spoil any plot details. I went in knowing exactly as much as I've outlined above and I think you should, too.
The story is told in two parts: before the storm and after the storm. We switch between flashbacks to events that Tami is remembering before she and Richard began their trip from Tahiti to California and events in the present. As the story progresses, we start to see the traces of their earlier experiences: we see where she got a dress, why he uses a particular phrase, or how to perform a task. I found it to be a very effective method of making the audience care about the characters. If I had seen the events happen in chronological order, I don't think that I would have been as affected. The story shows you the struggle to survive, it also shows you how far the characters have come and how deep they are digging to find that previously unknown reserve of strength.
Tami and Richard are accomplished sailors. They have many years of experience between them and have every confidence that they can sail across the Pacific Ocean. And in any other year, they would have been successful. In any other year, this story has a completely different ending. In any other year, this story would not have the emotional impact and resonance that it does.
Go watch Adrift. Both Sam Claflin and Shailene Woodley are great but Woodley herself is absolutely compelling as Tami. Leave yourself some time to process after it's over, too. I know I needed it.
Each year, Arlaine and I look forward to Summer Movie Madness. The blockbusters and silly comedies and cheesy action movies that alternate throughout the summer months, culminating in August Movies.
What is an August Movie? It is not merely a movie that is released in August, no, it is so much more than that. You can have an August movie released in any month, though I struggle to find an example of a truly August Movie showing up at any other time. Sound off in the comments if you can think of one, I'd like to read your take.
First and foremost, August Movies are cheesy. Truly and deeply cheesy and they know it. It's a movie that commits to the "blatantly inauthentic" nature of the story, the production, and the acting. It needs to be so bad, it's good. The kind of movie you hate-watch but kind of without the hate. You laugh, you cringe, you have a ton of fun, then immediately forget everything except the feeling of having been entertained.
August Movies also have a very simple premise. Think Snakes on a Plane (there are snakes, on a plane!), Premium Rush (courier needs to deliver a package by the deadline, or else!), and Piranha (there are piranhas! In unexpected bodies of water!). The story does not try to do too much. There's little character development, backstory, or growth. The problem is clear and the goal is to solve the problem. There's little deviation from the main story; we don't dive too deeply (if at all) into the lives of the secondary characters.
There might be a recognizable star in an August Movie but they're rarely a mega-blockbuster star. They are the source of credibility for the movie. You probably went to see Snakes on a Plane because Samuel L. Jackson was the star. You wanted to hear him say motherfucker and you wanted to hear him do that sort of half-shouted speech he does when he's explaining why some other character is so dumb that they're going to die if they don't fall in line and listen up. The story becomes a vehicle for the star but not in the traditional sense: the star isn't trying to raise their career profile with this epic masterpiece of cinema. They're probably paying the bills or fulfilling a contract they signed many years before.
What does this have to do with The First Purge, you say? Allow me to dig deeper.
The First Purge (RottenTomatoes and IMDB) is directed by Gerard McMurray and stars Y'lan Noel, Lex Scott Davis, Jovian Wade, and includes actors Marissa Tomei and Patch Darragh. The movie is the fourth in The Purge franchise and follows the events of the first purge night: a night where all crime is legal. Staged as an experiment by a psychologist (Tomei) funded by the right-wing political party New Founding Fathers leaders (Darragh). Limited to Staten Island in New York City, we see the tension between those who object to purge night, those who want to capitalize on an opportunity, and those who are truly invested in the success of the purge.
Based on the trailers, you'd be forgiven for thinking The First Purge is an August Movie. (The movie itself has graphic elements. This is the green band trailer. You can decide if you want to watch.)
Mild spoilers ahead. Continue from this point after you've seen the movie or if you don't mind having some plot details described before you've seen The First Purge.
It looks like it should be an August Movie, right? It looks as though it has all the right elements: It looks really cheesy, it has a simple premise, and there's a couple people you recognize but no one who is a super-mega movie star. However upon closer inspection, the First Purge is more than an August Movie.
On the surface, this looks like a cheesy thriller/horror movie. There are costumes and masks and jump scares and gore. But that is the trailer. That's what gets you in the cinema. The core of the story is really about why the concept of a purge could arise in a population. There's some minimally veiled commentary on race and poverty. The story, the real story is about how people are being coerced into participating in something that will perpetuate all the negative stereotypes about their neighbourhood and the politicians who profit from it all.
The story is not subtle. It is the very opposite of subtle. There is a scene where a character is attacked and she escapes after using pepper spray, shouting at him "fuck you! pussy grabbing mother fucker!" (I'm paraphrasing here). I don't remember the exact line but she absolutely called him out for being a pussy grabber. Now, where else have you heard that phrase? That's right. There are also scenes where trucks full of men in full KKK costumes and gangs of bikers wearing Nazi symbols roam around and hunt people. They're hired by the New Founding Fathers political party to rile up the people, causing them to fight back and look like they're participating in the purge. The KKK and the Nazis are the people the politicians have brought in to stir the pot and cause people to join in the violence on purge night (regardless of whether it's self defence). Yeah, the story is not subtle. At. All.
Nor is it inauthentic. The characters don't have much of a back story, true, but they are genuine and earnest in their desire to protect their family, friends, and neighbourhood. They believe that people aren't as bad as the experimenters think they are. They gather at their church and take care of one another. They protest the experiment and try to convince people not to participate. When it's all over, the movie sticks with you. I remember sitting there when the lights came up thinking "wow, I can't believe they made that movie" because of the direct commentary on American politics I mentioned earlier.
The story is simple enough: the first purge night is happening and people are trying to survive. Politicians and psychologists are watching via CCTV from a safe distance (naturally) while the main characters are on the ground trying not to be killed (or worse). We see a couple short scenes in the days leading up to the purge experiment but the bulk of the story focuses on the hours where the purge is active. The tight timeline means we don't have to worry about the story going beyond what it should be: surviving the purge.
The First Purge might be a summer movie but it is definitely not an August Movie. It's a smart, albeit on the nose, commentary on American politics as it attempts to answer the question: how could this ever happen? We see that the purge was never meant to help those who are purging. It was always meant to be a means to control poorer people and generate profit for the rich who own the companies that provide the weapons, personal protection equipment, and home security systems that we have seen become the norm for many in the other movies of the franchise. The Purge series may have started as a gory thriller but it's grown into an intelligent allegory for the political tensions happening in America (and elsewhere, too) and even if you have never seen any of the movies in the franchise, The First Purge is a must see.
This week's Trailer Tuesday is dedicated to the first trailer for 2014's X-Men: Days of Future Past. This trailer was released last week and has me even more excited for the upcoming Marvel film. Check it out here:
Words cannot describe how incredible this film will be. Yes, I choose to be completely optimistic with the outcome of this film. Because we all know that this could also go completely WRONG. But I am hoping that director Bryan Singer wouldn't tackle this complicated storyline without having a good story to back it up.
In one of the most META films to be released in the past few years, Days of Future Past is a sequel to X-Men: The Last Stand, X-Men: First Class, and The Wolverine. Yep, it's a sequel to THREE movies. And on top of that, the film will feature stars from all three movies. How is this possible, you might be wondering. Well, the film will feature two time lines that will, eventually, cross. So you will get to see both wonderful portrayals of Professor X and Magneto: James McAvoy and Sir Patrick Stewart as Professor X and Michael Fassbender and Sir Ian McKellan as Magneto. Amazing.
Other stars from the franchise returning include: Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry, Jennifer Lawrence, Anna Paquin, Ellen Page, Shawn Ashmore, and Nicholas Hoult.
The only unfortunate thing about this upcoming film is that both Cyclops and Jean Grey will not be featured as both of their characters were killed off (wrongly so) in X-Men: The Last Stand.
If the trailer doesn't get you hyped up for the upcoming Marvel film, check out the promotional posters that has been released:
For more on the upcoming superhero film, check out the wikipedia page here or the official movie page here.
I caught this film on TV the other day and couldn't help but watch it again. Originally, we (the Movie Geeks) had seen this film on the big screen during our Winter 2011 movie season. We took a gamble on it, and it paid off. I decided to re-watch it that lazy Sunday when it happened to come on TV and I was once again impressed with the outcome.
The Lincoln Lawyer
Director: Brad Furman
Starring: Matthew McConaughey, Marissa Tomei, Ryan Phillippe
Released: 2011
Box Office Gross: $57,981,889
(USA) Throwback Review
The Lincoln Lawyer stars McConaughey, in a similar role as to the one that gave him "street cred" in 1996's A Time to Kill.McConaughey plays criminal defense attorney Mick Haller who operates in LA county out of his black Lincoln Town Car. Making a career on defending small-time criminals, Haller lands the case of his career when Louis Roulet (Phillippe), a rich playboy, is accused of the brutal beating (and attempted murder) of a prostitute.
Believing his client, Haller and his private investigator Frank Levin (William H. Macy), dig deeper into the case to find that not everything is what it seems to be.
I know what you're thinking: typical thriller/drama with McConaughey playing the charming, misunderstood title character who turns out to really possess a heart of gold. Usually, you can easily write-off this type of film by your first viewing of the teaser trailer. But you'd miss out on a very decent crime thriller.
McConaughey returns to his previous "decent actor" status with this "safe choice" role. But don't punish him for taking this safe path...it worked out in his favourite - it reminds audience why we became fans of his work in the first place.
Phillippe is good in the role of the playboy with a dark side. Not standout or memorable by no means, but not horrible. He didn't bring anything new to the role; was almost a mash up of some of his previous work (think I Know What You Did Last Summer meets Cruel Intentions).
Macy is his usual brilliant self. Not much to say about his role other than it was great.
Final Verdict: See it. Take this film for what it is - don't go into it expecting to see breakout acting or a stellar storyline. It's engaging. It's charming. It's bottom line: entertaining.
New Release Review Director: Ron Howard Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Daniel Bruhl, Olivia Wilde
Rush tells the story of two Formula 1 drivers and their rivalry during the 1970s: Nikki Lauda (Bruhl) of Austria and James Hunt (Hemsworth) of England. Starting in Formula 3, we follow their respective careers as they both work towards being selected for a professional Formula 1 team and achieving greatness by winning the driver's championship.
If you're not a fan of racing, Formula 1, or cars in general, you're still going to love this movie, I promise. Director Ron Howard has created a movie around racing that tells the story of Lauda and Hunt, two very different people with very different approaches to the sport of racing. For Hunt, life is a party and every time he gets in the car he's prepared to risk everything - even his life - to win. Lauda, on the other hand, races because it's something he's good at and therefore is not prepared to race where the risk of injury is over 20 percent. The tension stems from their competitive natures; each strive to beat the other and are pushed outside their comfort zones with surprising results.
The story is centered on, and narrated by, Lauda, so we get a little more insight into his actions and motivations. Yet we do see much of Hunt's side of the story, in fact we're introduced to him first, and we only meet Lauda through the eyes of James Hunt. It's interesting how your perception of Lauda is coloured by Hunt's initial impressions, and how we come to understand and appreciate both men as the movie progresses. Arlaine made an interesting observation after Rush was over and we were watching the credits: You don't have one character you're rooting for more than another. In other words, there is no hero/villain relationship established and that's what makes Rush so refreshing: it's a real story about real people.
The last few scenes of the movie incorporate some great footage of the actual Lauda and Hunt and wow, did they ever get the casting right. These two actors look a lot like the people they're playing which was a relief. I was concerned that Hemsworth only got the role because of his Avengers/Thor star power but in addition to his looks and star power, he brings depth to the character who lives a lot of life on the surface. Daniel Bruhl also was exceptional in the role of Nikki Lauda, adding some softness to the serious personality for which Lauda is known. (Bonus points for having the real Lauda give a stamp of approval on the movie and the portrayal of characters)
Verdict? See it. On the biggest screen you possibly can. The racing scenes have some amazing camera angles that you just don't see on TV broadcasts of races. We saw it in "Ultra AVX" and it was totally worth it.
Director: Bennett Miller Writers: Stephen Zaillian, Aaron Sorkin, Stan Chervin, Michael Lewis (Author of "Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game") Starring: Brad Pitt, Jonah Hill, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Robin Wright Released: 2011
Moneyball is based on the real-life story of Billy Beane (played by Brad Pitt), General Manager of the Oakland A's (Athletics) major league baseball team and his attempt to create a championship team using a controversial statistical method based on computer modeling. Essentially, each player's performance is reduced to a series of values using sophisticated formulas and then the 'perfect' team is created by adding together each player's performance values. For the purposes of Moneyball, Beane is most interested in a player's on base percentage (the number of times he gets on base per at-bat) as that is what his economist-turned-baseball-analyist Peter Brand (Jonah Hill) has determined to be the most influential factor in winning games.
Still with me? Good, because I don't like baseball. Like, I really don't like baseball. I don't like watching it. I don't like playing it. I just don't. like. baseball. I also am not a huge Brad Pitt fan. I find he's getting more interesting roles as he gets older but overall he's not a box-office draw for me. Having said that, I truly enjoyed Moneyball. It's a fantastic story of using your available resources to create the best product possible within the confines of a fundamentally unfair system. In this case it's a baseball team and in spite of the sports focus you find yourself rooting more for Beane and Brand than the team itself, as the two make last-minute trades to craft the perfect team and struggle against the team's manager (played by a suitably apathetic Hoffman).
After an extreme delay in new posts, Don't Sit Next To Us is back!
A newly release trailer for the 2014 remake of RoboCop has sparked my creativity and has resulted in this week's edition of Trailer Tuesday! Check out the trailer here:
At first I was very apprehensive about this remake. And I will admit, I am still skeptical about whether or not this film can actually do the original justice (the stigma of the remake of Total Recall is strong) after seeing this trailer, some of my worries have been lifted.
I can't get over the cast. Though we have seen in the past that a great cast does not equal a great movie, I have faith that this particular cast (that includes Gary Oldman, Michael Keaton, Jackie Earle Haley, and the biggest bad ass of all time, Samuel L. Jackson) just might be able to carry this film.
The title character will be played by Joel Kinnaman, a relatively unknown Swedish actor who is probably best known for his role in The Killing. In true Hollywood fashion, numerous A-list actors were rumoured to play the part, including Keanu Reeves, Tom Cruise, Michael Fassbender, and yes, even my husband Johnny Depp. But it was Kinnaman who won the role and frankly, I am relieved. It's the type of role an established A-list actor cannot take on. We need a fresh face, someone who can essentially BE RoboCop in the audience's eyes. Not Neo, Maverick, Magneto, or Captain Jack AS RoboCop.
The actual storyline seems pretty true to the original save one major detail - RoboCop's suit will be BLACK! Whoooaaa now! Hold the press!
I think it's safe to say I am now excited for this film and will happily add this to the Winter 2014 Movie List.
The film is set to be released on February 7, 2014 (a month known for it's unexpected film hits ala August) and will be directed by big screen newcomer Jose Padilha.
For more information on the upcoming sci-fi action film, check out the Wikipedia page here or the official movie page here.
Be sure to check out Don't Sit Next To Us for all the latest updates on the film!
New Release Review Starring: Charlie Hunnam, Idris Elba, Rinko Kikuchi, Charlie Day, Burn Gorman, and Ron Perlman Director: Guillermo del Toro
Pacific Rim is the story of kaiju (monsters) coming to Earth via a dimensional rift deep in the Pacific and attacking the nations bordering the ocean. The world then comes together against this common enemy and build the jaegers (robots) to counter the kaiju attack. This small background is explained in an effective prologue, narrated by the main character: kaiju pilot Raliegh Becket.
I have to give Pacific Rim a lot of credit for at least trying to have a plausible story and, unlike many of the giant-robots-saving-humanity movies, not feeling like the acting was a way to join together the fight scenes. There are a few characters who have personal challenges to face which brings a certain depth to the fighting because we know who they are and why they're fighting. I really enjoyed watching the characters of Raleigh and Mako grow together as co-pilots of the Gypsy Danger jaeger. Pilots link minds in order to jointly control the jaeger and in the process they share memories and in the process create a bond that is so strong they can anticipate each other's moves and become an exceptional fighting team.
I saw Pacific Rim in 3D and it was totally worth it. When you've got a movie like this which is all about spectacle why not go all the way? The kaiju are given a lot of screen time so we get a chance to really see what makes them all different and what special offensive powers each brings to the fight. The kaiju get progressively more threatening and more powerful filling the fights with...not tension, since we know that Americans don't lose...filling the fights with curiosity. The question "how will they get out of this one?" makes these scenes very entertaining, if not entirely believable from an engineering perspective. One of my co-workers was very annoyed at the way the jaegers walked through the waters of Hong Kong bay as though there was no resistance at all but really, if that's the part of the movie you have a problem with - not the giant monsters, nor the mind-melding technology, not even the deep-sea technology used to view the portal - then the movie can't be that bad.
Overall it's a brilliant show of monsters, robots, and martial arts on a massive scale. Throw in some fairly stereotypical characters from Australia, Russia, China, and United States, and you've got yourself an entertaining movie. Pacific Rim is worth seeing - if only for Ron Perlman and his fantastically over the top black market mobster Hannibal Chau.
P.S. There is an extra scene about half-way through the credits so don't leave right away :)
Yes, we are still here and we're still seeing movies - but they're few and far between. This summer held a lot of promise for some interesting and entertaining blockbusters and so far we've been disappointed. So disappointed, in fact, that we actually skipped some movies on our list.
Never fear! We've finally seen something (and something worth writing about) so over the next few days you'll see reviews on Pacific Rim, The Conjuring, Turbo, and Wolverine.
Here's hoping the late-summer movies include a surprise hit like last year's Premium Rush.
Now You See Me is 115 minutes long and I enjoyed the first 85 of those minutes. As the audience we're following Agent Rhodes so as he's investigating how the illusion was performed, we're also trying to figure out how the bank was robbed. This leads to a lot of fun guessing on our part and I think that's what keeps our attention focused on the story. We know it's a trick so we're paying attention to everything, hoping for a clue, so we can solve the mystery. The story itself isn't that strong and there are a lot of holes but as you're watching, you're too distracted by the illusions to really notice (or care).
The major problem I had with this movie is that it didn't know where to stop. I won't spoil the ending, but there is a little bit of a twist, which would have made for a very strong ending that left most of the interpretation up to the audience. Some people say that type of ending is a cop-out because trying to be all things to all people often ends up being very little to very few. Yet I feel it's a very strong way to end a movie that's all about illusion and perception because as we've been told throughout the movie, the closer you think you are, the less you actually see. But by showing us so much at the end the illusion is lost; the game is over. It's the equivalent of turning on the lights before the movie is over. The world that was created on the screen and in our minds is now not a magical place but just like the world outside. Ultimately, Now You See Me leaves you feeling very unsatisfied and disappointed, which is a shame because the majority of the movie was so entertaining.
Verdict? See it, but know you're going to find the epilogue section very unsatisfying. It's a lot of fun and a much needed break from the summer superhero and robot blockbusters.
Something unusual happened this weekend: I didn't go to the movies.
Now, if you're a regular reader of Don't Sit Next to Us you'll know that a weekend without a visit to the cinema is a rarity - especially during the summer movie season. But I didn't go. I didn't want to see Fast and Furious 6000 or The Hangover, or see any of the previously released movies for a second time. So I stayed home (I actually had a nap - what an exciting life I lead). Arlaine went to see Fast and Furious and she said it was amazing so if you're a fan of that series you'll want to check out her review (coming soon).
Later that same day...
It's 9 o'clock and I'm looking for something interesting to watch on TV. What to my wondering eyes should appear? But Robert Downey Jr. and Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. (If you've been paying attention to the summer blockbusters, you'll recognize that title as the last movie director Shane Black and RDJ worked together before teaming up for Iron Man 3.)
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (2005) is the pseudo-noir story of Harry Lockhart (Downey), a thief-turned-actor who is learning how to be a private detective by shadowing Gay Perry (Val Kilmer). The two stumble into a murder plot and the story takes many twists and turns from there.
I loved this movie. It's got RDJ at what I consider to be his best. I find him to be most interesting and most compelling when he isn't playing the incredibly confident and self-assured Sherlock Holmes/Tony Stark characters that have been his default state as of late. Iron Man 3 had a little of that vulnerability but it was used as an obstacle he had to overcome rather than a personality trait. The character of Harry narrates at the beginning and the end of the movie and the way in which he narrates is almost exactly what I'm thinking when I watch a movie. Seriously, it's like the writer sat beside me during a movie and copied down my sarcastic comments for future use.
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang draws upon Tarantino-style of conversation at times yet, unlike many Tarantino-style monologues, manages to feel spontaneous and realistic. There are some genuine laughs to be had for such a dark storyline so don't be fooled by the pseudo-noir and murder mystery themes. Stylistic "auteur" elements like the pausing of the film while the narrator is on a tangent or the meta, self-referential commentary on what the audience is seeing are thankfully kept to a minimum at the beginning and the end of the movie. It allows the story to unfold and draw us into this warped world of Hollywood and hangers-on without being distracted by the unnecessary reminders that we're watching a movie.
Overall I'd definitely recommend Kiss Kiss Bang Bang to anyone who enjoys noir, neo-noir, dark comedy, murder mysteries, and Robert Downey, Jr.. It's a lot like Seven Psychopaths from last year - which I just realized I never reviewed (so look for that in the coming weeks as well)!
We are due for another year chop full of superhero films! Check out the first trailer for November's Thor: The Dark World:
This is one superhero film I am really excited to see. Not a huge fan of Thor, I found myself really enjoying the first film. And not solely because they chose the best actor to portray the title character. The story was really well done. And it also helped that Kenneth Branagh was in the director's chair. Unknown director Alan Taylor has replaced Branagh which could go either way: could be good because he isn't influenced by big budget action/sets/props like some hollywood directors (Michael Bay, I'm looking at you) or it could be bad because he really has no clue what to do with a film of this size. I'm hoping it's the former and he will have a "Joss Whedon" moment with this film.
Unlike a lot of superhero films, a sequel to 2011's Thor makes sense. There were a lot of questions left unanswered with the previous film (and subsequently 2012's epic superhero mash-up The Avengers) and a lot of story left to tell. And with a dynamic villain such as Loki (portrayed by the brilliant Tom Hiddleston), there's no telling where what we will see in this upcoming film.
The trailer doesn't follow the typical superhero film trailer format. Instead of focusing on the big fight and action scenes, we see more about the characters and the story behind them. We get to see a further look into the world of Asgard (and the worlds surrounding it) that we only caught a glimpse of in the first film. We also get to see that Thor has completely embraced his "hero" fate.
The sequel sees returns from actors Chris Hemsworth (in the title role), Hiddleston, Natalie Portman, Kat Denning, Stellan Skarsgard, and Anthony Hopkins as Thor's father and King of Asgard. New to the franchise is Christopher Eccelston, who will be taking on the role of the main antagonist in this film, Malekith. I'm excited to see what he will bring to this role as he is a great actor who can take on any role.
The film is set to be released on November 8, 2013 and will unfortunately be converted to 3D post-production. Oh joy. (Have you seen Clash of the Titans? Check out our review of that mess here).
For more information on the upcoming film, check out the official page here or the Wikipedia page and be sure to check Don't Sit Next To Us for updates!
The first teaser trailer for the second installment in The Hunger Games trilogy has been released! Check it out:
The sequel to the hugely successful first film, entitled The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, picks up directly where we left off in the 2012 film with Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) having outsmarted the Capitol alongside Peeta Mallerk (Josh Hutchison) and winning the Hunger Games. The pair must now embark on a "Victor's Tour" of the other districts and Katniss begins to sense that a rebellion is brewing amongst the poorer districts. The Capitol, however, is still very much in control, and preparing for the 75th Annual Hunger Games, which will incorporate a twist that changes everything for the pair and Panem.
It goes without saying that this film will be successful. The series has gained a huge following before it was even brought to the big screen. Fans of the novel series rushed to the theatres to see the first film, allowing it to earn a very substantial amount at the box office. However, the film itself was well received by critics. Director Gary Ross created a very believable version of Suzanne Collins' novel which was well liked by fans and critics, something that doesn't always happen.
For the second film, Ross left the director role and Francis Lawrence (who's films include I Am Legend, Constantine, and Water For Elephants) was brought on to direct. Lawrence will also be directing the final two installments (which is a two part film adaptation of the third novel in the series, Mocking Jay) of the film series.
The trailer. Wow. What a great first glimpse at the dystopian future that Collins' envisioned. This is what a trailer should look like. It was great from start to finish. We see Katniss and Peeta being welcomed by one of the districts while on the "Victor's Tour", which should be a joyous occasion but is anything but. Something has changed in the public and The Capitol is ready to snuff out this "hope" before it creates an uprising. That means Katniss has become public enemy number 1 in their eyes.
And what a cast! Along with Lawrence (who just picked up an Oscar for her role in Silver Linings Playbook) and Hutchison, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Lenny Kravitz, Elizabeth Banks, Stanley Tucci and Donald Sutherland all return to reprise their roles. Joining them are Jena Malone and Phillip Seymour Hoffman. That scene shown in the trailer with Sutherland and Hoffman is dynamic and I can't wait to see more!
I'm not going to talk too much more about this trailer as I will save my thoughts for our review when the film is released.
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is set to be released on November 22, 2013.
For more information on the upcoming film, check out the Wikipedia page or the official page.
Looks like we are in for a summer of sci-fi movies and I couldn't be happier! Check out this trailer for Elysium:
Wow! That was my first thought after seeing this trailer. Just WOW.
Elysium is director Neill Blomkamp's first film since 2009's game-changer District 9. We see Blomkamp once again team up with Sharlto Copley (the two previously worked together in District 9 and Alive in Joburg) and also stars Matt Damon, Jodie Foster, William Fichtner, and Diego Luna.
In the distant future, the wealthy and elite live on Elysium, a man-made space station in Earth's orbit, and the rest of the population live on what's left of Earth. The elite enforce anti-immigration laws in order to preserve the luxurious lifestyle of those living on Elysium while the people on Earth continue to fight to get into the station. Max (Damon), whose health is deteriating, agrees to take on a dangerous mission that sees him take on the ones in power on Elysium and could not only save his life, but also bring peace and equality to these two worlds.
What really stood out for me after seeing this trailer were the effects. Blomkamp has a knack for creating realistic, sci-fi scenes, props and creatures. He steps outside of the box and does not do what you expect of a sci-fi film director and I believe that is what makes his films come together so well. If this film is anywhere near what he accomplished with District 9 (which was one of the best films of 2009), we are in for a treat!
The film is set to be released on August 9, 2013.
For more information on the upcoming sci-fi flick, check out the Wikipedia page here and stay tuned to Don't Sit Next To Us for the latest updates.
On a cold and rainy Saturday morning, I watched Winter's Bone. I was curious about this critically acclaimed movie from 2010 that I had no access to when it was first released.
In their review of the 2010 independent film Winter’s Bone, Michael Moon and Colin Talley draw upon the concept of the “shatter zone” in order to illuminate the local features of the film as well as to locate its place in the history of hill regions as sites of refuge and resistance. This review finds additional contexts for the film in regional music and the long-established "dark-fairytale" tradition of the Appalachians and the Ozarks.
Spoiler alert: this review contains details of the plot.
I highly recommend that you give this article a read. I was particularly interested in the concepts of the totemic animals - from the deer on Ree's sweater, to the carved horn neclace, to the antlers hanging from the mirror of her uncle's truck.
G.I. Joe: Retaliation
Director: Jon Chu
Starring: Dwayne Johnson, Channing Tatum, and Bruce Willis New Release Review
I can't believe we saw this in theatre. We were desperate to see something and March had been a month with little to offer in terms of decent movies. It was the last weekend of the month and there we were, stuck with nothing on our Spring 2013 Movie List and an incredible need to just be in the theatre, not caring what we were going to see.
This "sequel" starts with the G.I. Joes being framed for stealing nuclear warheads from Pakistan by Zartan who, as seen in the finale of the first film, is impersonating the American President. The team is attacked and eliminated, including Duke (Tatum), with Roadblock (Johnson), Flint (D.J. Cotrona) and Lady Jaye (Adrianne Palicki) as the only survivors.
Storm Shadow (Byung-hun Lee) and Firefly (Ray Stevenson) attempt to rescue Cobra Commander (who is NOT being played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt) from a futuristic prison in Germany. In a very random and unorganized scene, Storm Shadow is captured, to almost immediately after, break out and manage to rescue Cobra Commander. He is injured in the escape and heads, again randomly, to the Himalayas to recover. And then we are introduced to the Blind Master (RZA), the leader of the Arashikage Clan (the clan that Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow grew up and studied in), sends Snake Eyes (Ray Park) and his apprentice Jinx (Elodie Yung) to capture Storm Shadow so that he can answer for the murder of the Hard Master (who we saw in a flash back in the first film, murdered by what was assumed to be a young Storm Shadow).
Branded as traitors and Enemies of the State, Roadblock, Flint and Lady Jaye return to the USA where they set up base in Roadblock's home town and plan to take down Zartan and the Cobra. Battles continue, cheesy lines are abundant and the already messy storyline continues until it's lame ending.
Can you tell that I did not enjoy this film in the slightest? Okay, maybe I am being too harsh. But it was awful. Bad acting. Bad writing. Bad fight scenes. Bad graphics. Bad everything!
Where the previous film (see our Throwback review here) tried to become more futuristic, this film tried to revert back to the original tactics that we all knew and loved from the G.l. Joe franchise. However, it failed miserably. The story had to be the worst part of the film. It jumped all over the place, never quite finding its way. Everything seemed to happen at random. There was no explanation (not that we always need one but is appreciated when new things seemingly "pop" up out of nowhere) as to why things were happening. They just did. It's almost like the writers had a free-for-all and took whatever ideas they all had, and mashed them up into one big, giant pile of crap.
The other major issue with this film is that it did not follow ANY of the storylines that were previously created in the first film. There was no mention of former Joe team members. They simply just weren't there. Sure, Tatum was included in the cast. But was killed off within the first 15 minutes of the film (which apparently was an extended appearance by Tatum than was originally planned). Never mind references the events that took place in the 2009 film.
The acting was so bad, it's not even worth mentioning. Don't be fooled: despite what the promotional material for this film showed, Willis is BARELY in the film. But I will give him this: the scenes he was in, were the best ones.
And why was this film in 3D? It definitely did not warrant a 3D conversion. From the 2D version that we saw, there was no point in having this film featured in 3D. Not one thing flew out at the screen. And there was nothing worth enhancing in terms of graphics. Enhancing them would only magnify this monstrosity. Final Verdict: Skip it. Do I need to explain any further why? Simply a waste of time. Did the people behind this film spend the entire budget on converting it to 3D and securing action stars Willis and Johnson? Well, it wasn't worth it. And the comedic relief? Sure, we laughed. We laughed at how pathetic this latest Hasbro film was. Now YOU know, and knowing is half the battle.
I don't know how I went through today without knowing this had happened. I honestly just read a headline and had an honest-to-goodness "whaaaaat?" moment: I'm truly shocked.
I want to say so much about the man whose blog and twitter feeds have inspired me to start writing what I think about movies. I know I'm not the only one. I don't know what film criticism will be like without him but I do know that we're all better off for having read his words at all. I feel like I knew him because knowing what someone likes and dislikes is a very intimate relationship. I'd see a movie based on his recommendation because I trusted his opinion, and now that is over.
I wish I could say something profound. I want to be eloquent in this moment but all I can offer is my reaction: I'm terribly saddened by this news. Roger Ebert's recent shift from TV to the web inspired me and now his voice is gone. I feel like a friend has died though I'd never met the man, nor even seen him in person. Funny, insightful, and always intelligent, that is how I'll remember Roger. How will you?
After seeing G.I. Joe: Retaliationthis past weekend, I thought it was only fitting that for this week's Throwback Thursday we review the first film, G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra.
G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra
Director: Stephen Sommers
Starring: Channing Tatum, Marlon Wayans, and Dennis Quaid
Released: 2009
Box Office: $150,167,630
(USA) Throwback Review
G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra takes place in the near future where weapons master James McCullen (Christopher Eccelston) has created a weapon capable of destroying a city. He has utilized a new chemical weapon called nanotech to create four warheads through his company M.A.R.S. and sells them to NATO. NATO troops led by American soldiers Duke (Tatum) and Ripcord (Wayans) who are to deliver the warheads but their convoy is ambushed by the Baroness (Sienna Miller) and a group of unknown soldiers. Duke recognizes the Baroness to be his ex-fiancee Ana Lewis and neither are able to kill the other. He (along with Ripcord) are rescued by a group of elite soldiers, including Scarlett (Rachel Nichols), Snake Eyes (Ray Park), Breaker (Said Taghmaoui), and Heavy Duty (Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje) and they are taken to the G.I. Joe base. There they meet General Hawk (Quaid) who reluctantly lets them join his team.
With the aid of the Doctor (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), McCullen plans to use the nanotechnology to build an army of soldiers. They plan to use the warheads as a way to create chaos that will result in a new world order, led by M.A.R.S. The Joes work together to try and stop McCullen while Duke also tries to save Ana (The Baroness).
The film is weak. It's not awful, but it is weak. The storyline isn't bad - it's just so far from the original G.I. Joe franchise. This is what makes the film so laughable to most audiences and critics. I understand where the makers of the film were coming from; they wanted to maintain that G.I. Joe mentality but update their devices and foes to make them more relevant to the current film industry that is filled with high-tech action movies. But by doing that, they lost all of the charm and nostalgia from the original series and even the toys that people grew up on.
The cast was pretty good. Quaid, Gordon-Levitt and Eccelston were the obvious strong points of this cast, with Gordon-Levitt "commanding" the screen with each scene he was in. Eccelston is a fantastic villain but was given barely anything to work with. The rest of the cast were decent but nothing remarkable. Tatum was purely eye-candy in this role and Wayans was clearly included for comedic relief (which he provided in spades). The rest of the cast? Forgettable.
Final Verdict: Skip it. Only marginally better than the latest film in the franchise and a little long, especially with the weak storyline and lackluster cast. If you're feeling nostaglic, want to hear some classic G.I. Joe lines (Quaid gets to say the line "...and knowing is half the battle") and are in the mood for a mindless action film, this is good choice. But don't expect it to be on par with the other action films of this generation. It's more like the cheesy-ness of Battleship but tries to be like Transformers. After watching the latest G.I. Joe film, you'll be wishing the makers stuck with the format used in this film.
Oz the Great and Powerful
Director: Sam Raimi
Starring: James Franco, Mila Kunis, Michelle Williams, and Rachel Weisz
New Release Review
Well it's been almost four weeks since these Movie Geeks have been to the movies. A travesty, I know. The lack of decent films being released on top of being a busy month, March has not been kind to Don't Sit Next To Us. But, don't fret! We are back! And here is your first new release review: Oz the Great and Powerful.
Oz takes place twenty years prior to the events that take place in The Wizard of Oz where we first meet Oscar "Oz" Diggs (Franco) who is working as a small-time traveling magician. Escaping a confrontation with the circus strongman, Oscar takes off in a hot air balloon and is sucked into a tornado that takes him to the Land of Oz. After his crash landing, Oscar meets a witch named Theodora (Kunis) who believes Oscar is the wizard prophesied to overthrow the Wicked Witch who killed her father, the king of Oz. The two begin the journey towards Emerald City after Oscar jumps at the notion that he will be the new king of Oz. They share a flirtatious moment and Theodora quickly falls for Oscar, hoping that she will be his queen.
Along the way, they encounter a flying monkey named Finley (Zach Braff) who Oscar saves from a lion. Finley pledges a life debt to Oscar and becomes a trusted companion for the wizard.
When he arrives at Emerald City, Oscar meets Evanora (Weisz), Theodora's sister, who tells him that the Wicked Witch resides in the Dark Forest and can be killed by destroying her wand. Oscar and Finley go on a mission to destroy the witch so that Oscar can become King of Oz. Instead of meeting the Wicked Witch, Oscar discovers that it is Glinda the Good Witch who he was sent to kill and that Evanora is the true Wicked Witch. Reluctantly, Oscar joins forces with Glinda to stop Evanora and reclaim Oz.
I was rather indifferent about seeing this film in theatre. The storyline and the graphics definitely had me intrigued, but not enough to run to the theatre during opening weekend to see it. I happened to see it randomly and was happy with the outcome. It was enjoyable. It was a decent story with top notch 3D graphics. If it weren't for those graphics, the film would not be as fun.
This is what a 3D film should be - it enhanced the overall look of the film and it added depth, literally and figuratively. It made the audience feel like they were in the film. There are a lot of films out there that simply add the 3D effect in order to earn more revenue but definitely don't need it. This was not one of those films.
The acting was okay. Not what I expected from this cast. Franco wasn't anything special as the title character. He provided a few laughs but that's about it. It seemed like he was going through the motions with this film. But it also looked like he wasn't given much in terms of character development and depth.
The three witches (Kunis, Weisz and Williams) were very bland. Which was extremely surprising to me as all three are talented (in different ways) actresses. When they were evil, they weren't evil enough. And the film incorporates one of the most iconic evil characters in film/literature history. It definitely didn't feel that way with this portrayal of the character. Basically, I was bored while watching these characters.
Braff as the flying monkey, Finley, was decent. However, he reminded me a lot of Billy Crystal. His voice, his comedic timing, all things that Crystal has done in the past (think Monsters Inc.). Though his character was welcomed as he provided the majority of the comedy in this film.
Final Verdict: See it. It's a decent family/adventure film. It's from Disney, so you know right off the bat that it will be good to see. However, this re-imagining of the classic story of Oz is not where it should be. It is nowhere near the masterpiece that Tim Burton created with 2010's Alice in Wonderland(check out our review here). But it is an acceptable March release. Perhaps Franco's other March release, Spring Breakers provides him with a character that is more in his league and he can do more with.
For all you Marvel geeks out their, check out the teaser trailer for The Wolverine:
Looks like we are in for another summer of superhero films!
Everyone's favourite anti-hero is back in this second installment in the Wolverine and X-Men series. But this isn't your typical sequel. Because Marvel likes to make the X-Men series complicated, The Wolverine takes place after the events of the third X-Men film, X-Men: The Last Stand. For those that remember, X-Men Origins: Wolverinetook place before Wolverine joined the X-Men in the first film (X-Men). AND it is the sixth installment in the series, that also includes: X2: X-Men United and X-Men: First Class. The seventh installment, X-Men: Days of Future Past is already slated to be released in 2014.
Okay, now that we got that crazy background out of the way, let's discuss this week's trailer.
Hugh Jackman is back as the title character and is more disgruntled than ever. Still dealing with the fallout of the events in The Last Stand, Wolverine (Logan) is brought to Japan to meet with a mysterious man who he had once saved. The man, who is now on his death bed, presents Logan with a way to end his eternal life. Having struggled with his fate and what he has become for years, Logan is thrown into a state of vulnerability that he hasn't seen since he was a child.
There is no doubt that this film will be successful. Jackman has proven several times over that he has become the character of Wolverine. He has also proven that he can carry his own film featuring this fan-favourite X-Men character. This film also features another fan-favourite, this time in the form of the storyline which is based on the highly regarded comic book arc of the same name.
The last Wolverine film did not fare too well against critics so the team behind this second Jackman film decided to do something different. From a fan of the television series, I hope we get to see a few of our favourite and more well known X-Men characters which was something the previous film did. I'm still waiting for a bigger part for Gambit.
The latest in the X-Men series is set to be released on July 26, 2013. And yes, it will be in 3D. Because what isn't these days?
For more information on the upcoming Marvel film, check out the Wikipedia page or the film's official page.
