IRON MAN 3 TRAILER HAS INTRIGUING INSPIRATIONS

[Author’s note: I’m not overly fond of doing in-depth trailer talks. Too often movie trailers mislead us into making assumptions and judgments about a movie that end up being not at all representative of the finished product. That said, this one provided too much solid stuff to pass up, so here I go.]

            

Kicking off the second phase of Marvel’s shared universe of movies next summer is the long awaited Iron Man 3. Fans and spectators alike have been wondering not just what the third installment of Marvel’s most popular character (who doesn’t crawl walls) will be about, but how it will follow (and as Marvel hopes, tops) The Avengers, this summer’s mega-blockbuster. Now the first official trailer for the movie has debuted and it’s like “insert gift giving holiday here” come early. Not too much info is given away, but it is clear that the movie will be action packed and Tony Stark will be tested and pushed to the brink like never before. The two minute trailer makes it clear that the stakes have never been higher for our hero.

            

And in observing this dark tone, comparisons started to spring up that were most intriguing. From the somberness of the footage to certain shots and story elements, it started to seem more and more like the moderately light-hearted and jaunty fantasy tone of the first two Iron Man movies and The Avengers has been substituted for the gritty seriousness of Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy. Specifically, the trailer echoes a great many elements from this summer’s The Dark Knight Rises, Nolan’s third and final Batman movie to the point of making it look like it takes direct inspiration from it.

            

The Dark Knight Rises saw our protagonist hit his lowest point before he rose to overcome in the end. If the footage is to be believed, Tony Stark is also in for some hardship in Iron Man 3. He appears battered and defeated in many scenes. Voiceover of him talking about the many apologies he needs to make and how many people want to kill him puts a grim mood over everything. The trailer ends with a shot of Stark hauling his armor behind him, alone, in some remote winter area.

            

Even the font type of the giant “3” when the title card appears at the end is shown to be dying and crumbling away, exactly like the backdrop of DKR’s title card (a bat signal formed from what appears to be broken concrete).

            

Then there’s the villain. A fanatical terrorist leader, played by a respectable British actor (Tom Hardy as Bane in DKR, Ben Kingsley as The Mandarin in IM3) who’s speaking in an accent that doesn’t sound anything like their own voice, giving an ominous voiceover speech about what they consider themselves (“I’m Gotham’s Reckoning”; “Some people call me a terrorist. I consider myself a teacher.”). So, yes, as you can see, they’re not similar in any way.

            

Since we are talking about an Iron Man movie here, the footage wouldn’t be complete without a lot of stuff that goes boom. We are shown that Tony’s previous armors are destroyed by individual explosions, culminating in a scene in which Stark’s Cliffside mansion is leveled and blasted into the sea by a group of assault helicopters. This scene is sure to be one of the centerpieces in the middle of the movie, similar to the destruction of the football field and bridges in DKR. A looser tie-in, I know, but both scenes are treated similarly and feature prominently in their respected trailers.

            

And then it happens. Pepper Potts picks up a broken Iron Man helmet, a symbol of our protagonist’s humiliating defeat. Hmm… I don’t seem to recall any movie in recent memory where our hero gets his ass handed to him and has his shattered headgear used prominently to convey the severity of the beating. Except I do.

            

Maybe my geek brain is just working overtime on this one. And for all we know at seven months out, the movie itself could turn out to be nothing like the pointy-eared one’s final outing. But from here and now it is clear as crystal that Iron Man 3’s first trailer is attempting to be reminiscent of DKR. Which is weird because, if internet-land is to be believed, aren’t these two franchises supposedly mortal enemies? Is Robert Downey Jr. not on record saying he didn’t understand The Dark Knight? Aren’t Marvel fans Hatfields and Dark Knight fans McCoys, with no middle ground or tolerance of liking both franchises?

            

Joking aside, there are far worse ways of creating buzz for your trailer and it would be a lie to say this trailer doesn’t do just that. Iron Man 3 opens May 3, 2013.

UPCOMING HOME VIDEO RELEASES (PT. 2)

The June releases are being a fucking pill. Here we are in late August, and not even half of June's offerings have solidified their home video release dates. Damn you, Hunger Games. You had to pick the 5 month release window and now you scared all the other movies off. I hope you're proud.

Movies in June that probably won't make too big of a splash on video (or aren't worth going in to too much detail): That's My Boy is October 16, Madagascar 3 is also October 16, Rock of Ages is October 9, Madea's Witness Protection is October 23.

Because July has roughly only two or three huge releases worth focusing on, Part 3 will include Ted and Magic Mike since there is zilch info concerning them at this point.

Snow White and the Huntsman

Blu-Ray Release Date: September 11 (Rental: October 9)

One bad casting decision can totally make a movie implode upon itself. Luckily, the casting of Kristen Stewart didn't completely sink Snow White and the Huntsman, since it has some genuinely enjoyable things going on.

This movie ultimately succeeds due to its strong visual style and scenery-chewing performance by Charlize Theron. And, to my surprise, K-Stew is actually tolerable for most of the movie. Only when she has to give the corny, faux-inspirational speech does my acceptance sputter.

The big thing with this release is that it is an extended edition. Whether that means that an entire subplot is put back in, the rating has changed, or it's approximately 52 seconds longer like most extended editions is still unclear. However I will be looking at the behind the scenes special features to catch a glimpse of the "special work relationship" between Stewart and the director. And/or how hard the producers try to sidestep that aspect.

MOVIE: +
SPECIAL FEATURES: +
DIGITAL COPY: +

Prometheus

Blu-Ray Release Date: October 11 (Rental: November 8)

On October 11th, prepare to experience the disagreement at home. One of 2012's most anticipated and controversial films is sure to bring some far from unanimous opinions to the household.

There are two distinctive reactions people have had to this movie. First there is the camp that sees it as a thrilling sci-fi ride; a gorgeous-looking movie that asks big questions and takes viewers on an entertaining journey with standout performances. The other half practically loathes the movie for taking its story ambiguity to the point of being sloppy and full of holes, not to mention the general retarded-ness of a majority of the characters.

More so than some other movies this summer, I fully get both sides of the argument. I lean more towards the first half since I was pulled in for two hours, but the lack of logic is so blatant that very few people are likely to not have a "what?" moment somewhere in the movie.

The big news that's spread in recent days is that the Blu-Ray is supposed to contain up to 40 minutes (?!?!?) of deleted scenes. If edited back into the movie, that's more than enough to classify it as an extended edition or director's cut. And judging by the names of each deleted scene, they could be what provides answers to the many questions the movie left us with.

Worth noting is that, like the (first) video release of Fox's other big space epic, Avatar, Prometheus is landing on a Thursday.

MOVIE: + (NO GUARANTEES, THOUGH)

SPECIAL FEATURES: +

DIGITAL COPY: +

Brave

Blu-Ray Release Date: November 13 (Rental: December 11)

Pixar once ruled over everything the light touched when it came to producing quality animation in everything from reviews, grosses, and awards consideration. Then Cars 2 came along and threw it off a cliff after smugly proclaiming "long live the king".  Now, rather than jump right back, it's going to take a little time to recooperate before it reclaims its throne.

Brave is not a bad movie. In fact, it's pretty good and I liked it for the most part. All the technical aspects you'd expect a Pixar movie to excel in are great. However, the story plays more like a light, whimsical, stereotypical Disney movie than something with a good deal of depth like most previous Pixar movies. It's not a big complaint since that formula is tried and true, but there's a chance that older audience members may not find as much to interest them.

There isn't any info concerning special features at the moment, but animated Disney movies usually contain a bunch of interactive games for the kids and shit like that. Sometimes there's a focus on the artwork or short featurette. Until further notice, there probably won't be much to look forward to with this one's special features. [Actually, the special features have been revealed to be extensive. So shut my mouth.]

Something I forgot to mention with The Avengers, Disney's digital copy system occasionally irks me. If a movie had a 3D release in theaters (basically every single movie they release now), Disney will only include the digital copy in the 3D combo pack edition and leave the regular Blu-Ray edition as just a Blu-Ray and a DVD. As one of few studios that still supports the iTunes digital copy, being forced to pay more to get it, along with an extra disc for the 3D version you'll likely never use, feels like a punishment.

MOVIE: +

SPECIAL FEATURES: +

DIGITAL COPY: + & -

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

Blu-Ray Release Date: October 23 (Rental: November 20)

No doubt the title featured here that the fewest people have seen, the reason I included this one is because it has great potential to find new life on video.

Yes, you wondered about it but likely didn't shell out any money to go see it in theaters. But it's probably not because you didn't know what you were getting. There isn't much ambiguity to a movie like Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, although it does play things much more seriously than you may expect. Which, I found, made it more hilarious. Truthfully, this movie appeals to a very specific audience that can't be properly categorized, but those that find they enjoy it will likely help spread the word on it and, with time, may conceivably help it reach cult classic status.

MOVIE: FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF
SPECIAL FEATURES: ?
DIGITAL COPY: +

MOONRISE KINGDOM REVIEW

To allow you, my readers of any given article, in on my psyche for a brief moment, I sometimes feel bad about the fact that, because I am in a smaller city/medium-large town, I very rarely get the opportunity to review smaller, more independent movies when they are released in theaters. The reason for such being that they are almost never released in theaters here. I feel it sometimes makes me appear biased towards liking only the big-budget studio flicks and completely disregarding the indies. I do, in fact, like my fair share of smaller ventures. But if this bullshit is supposed to be what best represents a great independent movie, I'd choose the biggest, loudest blockbuster available any day of the week.

Moonrise Kingdom is about two misfit children, Sam Shakusky, the misunderstood orphan currently in a summer camp scout program, and Suzy Bishop, the outsider child of two lawyers, who decide to run away together on the vaguely east coast island they met on. Thus sparks a search party including everyone from Suzy's parents, Sam's scout leader, to the island police chief, and that creepy narrator guy who serves no purpose.

Not that he's ever been a box-office bombshell like the others, but Moonrise Kingdom is prime evidence for the argument that Wes Anderson is becoming the next Tim Burton, George Lucas, or any other once great filmmaker turned supposed hack. This movie reeks of being the product of a director who has escaped from having to answer to anybody and now does whatever he wants or doesn't want. Here, the want is to choose a premise and plug as many Anderson-isms as he can into it and the doesn't want is to tell a compelling story with interesting characters.

For a story that's inherently supposed to be warm and twee, Moonrise Kingdom is consistently cold and artificial. Anderson's omnipresent style suffocates the movie with its unnatural focus on having everything be quirky and different above everything else, not to mention majorly contradicts it. He clearly knows what he wants to technically do with the film, seeing how there is some very cool camera work, unique soundtrack choices, and playful editing; typical Wes Anderson stuff. But it's all similar to delivering extravagant trimmings with no real meat (story) as the centerpiece.

Barely anything that happens really matters or feels like it advances anything forward. Someone gets struck by lightning, a dog gets impaled by an arrow, that narrator dude I mentioned earlier pops up and gives mostly irrelevant information, and other wackiness happens. But there's no internal impact on the story or characters from it or even a reason for these things to happen in the first place. Even reactions as an audience member, whether they were intended to be comedic or tragic, didn't amount to more than a shrug.

None of the actors in this lineup are noteworthy. Even Murray and Schwartzman, Anderson's Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter regulars are wasted. Everyone may well have been on ambien because there are only fleeting glimpses of emotion that shine through. The veteran actors are at least able to keep from embarrassing themselves with the overly subdued acting style but the two main kids don't grasp Anderson's dialogue stanzas like others before have and get absolutely skewered by it. Unfortunately, they are the main focus of the movie and have the most drawn out scenes. After about 40 minutes in, having to watch them do little more than mumble like robots becomes near excruciating.

Believe it or not, this review is coming from the keyboard of someone who, statistically, likes most Wes Anderson movies. Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums are not only both very oddly funny but are also very investing and have their touching moments. The quirkiness comes naturally in order to serve the story (the most important thing). Moonrise Kingdom is only interested in piling the quirkiness on what's ultimately a non-existent foundation.

Die-hard fans of Anderson may find what they're looking for and excuse the absence of charm and investment but others who have already written it off as "hipster bullshit" probably won't find any reason to think otherwise.

3/10

UPCOMING HOME VIDEO RELEASES (PT. 1)

It's a fact that home viewing is largely the preferred form of movie watching these days. Now that the climax movie of the summer has seen the dark light of day in theaters and the season is winding down, it's about that time to look forward to when we can enjoy the biggest and bestest (arguable) this summer had to offer in the sanctity of our homes, now comparatively safer than ever.

I've mainly just thrown out my opinions for the last two months, so perhaps I'll do something helpful. Here are the deets on the home video releases of the four biggest movies released in May (The Dictator is August 21 and Chernobyl Diaries is October 16). Check back for the June releases at a time when more than only one has been announced.


The Avengers

Blu-Ray Release Date: September 25 (Rental: October 23)

The biggest movie of the summer will no doubt be the biggest Blu-Ray event of the fall. Disney is one of the leaders in putting together a great Blu-ray, so their most profitable movie ever should be nothing short of great. In addition to guaranteed top-tier picture and sound, the 3D combo pack comes with a free download of the soundtrack album and Whedon-filled behind the scenes goodies a-plenty, as well as a hard copy of the digital copy (compatible with iTunes).

Oh, in case you didn't hear, the movie also happens to be epic awesomesauce and many fans like myself will flock in droves to pick it up on release day.


Dark Shadows

Blu-Ray Release Date: October 2 (Rental: October 30)

Tim Burton's latest familiar-fest had the distinct honor of opening the week after The Avengers and I can't even imagine how much it suffered for it, financially (enough to be considered disappointing, but not quite a bomb -- maybe I can imagine). But, truthfully, this is the one movie I was this close to seeing the summer. I caught myself on the way out the door a couple times on the way to see Dark Shadows. I really like Burton's early works and this seems more in line with that Gothic style he does so well. The omnipresent criticism that he once again drops the story importance is what ultimately held me back.

As per every Warner Bros. title, you can expect one of those shitty Ultraviolet digital copies, the sole option they provide anymore for your digital copy needs, and a Maximum Movie Mode extra feature with highlights on Johnny Depp and production pinpoints and deleted scenes. Going to have to check this one out.

Battleship

Blu-Ray Release Date: August 28 (Rental: September 25)

Poor Taylor Kitsch. He's not a terrible actor but because he keeps getting stuck with the starring roles in these epic, epic bombs, people can't help but associate him with cinematic failure. It's really not his fault.

I'm also quite curious about this one. The best praise I've heard for Battleship is that it's stupid fun. Not "stupid fun" like Transformers, as in complete contempt for its audience by wasting most of its time on borderline retarded comedy, with the rest of it being incomprehensible, hollow action. Rather, it's been described as a "so stupid, it's entertaining" fun. Which I can totally dig. Hell, I enjoyed Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter more than I ever though I would, who's to say this will be any different.

Universal is also usually very impressive with their picture and sound, as well as including both kinds of digital copies and standard amount of behind the scenes featurettes. We shall see.

Men in Black 3

Blu-Ray Release Date: November 30 (Rental: December 28)

The Men in Black are back after a ten year hiatus, none of which was spent on choosing a decent story or building enthusiasm from any of the returning players. In case my views haven't permeated this intro enough, I didn't really care for MIB3. It came off as cheap, perfunctory, and just not all that entertaining, to my great regret.

Still, Sony does a pretty great job of their picture (which won't do any favors for those awful special effects) and sound. Not so much can be said for their singular offer of Ultraviolet digital copy, similar to Warner Bros. releases. Details were released prematurely a week ago and have since been pulled but appear to be pretty basic (making of, filming in 3D, trailer, etc.). Worth a rental. Maybe.

THOUGHTS ON THE DARK KNIGHT RISES OSCAR BUZZ

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences learned four years ago that they can't remain completely oblivious to the public's interests.

In 2008, The Dark Knight was the talk of the town (the town apparently being anywhere but Hollywood) to secure the fifth nomination slot for best picture at the upcoming Oscars.  However, despite garnering a total of eight nominations in the technical categories, the movie was snubbed in the major areas (picture, director, screenplay) and only walked away with wins in best sound editing and sound design, as well as the obvious best supporting actor trophy, posthumously awarded to Heath Ledger.

The following year the Academy amended its nomination rules and doubled the amount of movies eligible for best picture contention to ten, reportedly pressured by the backlash they faced for their previous exclusion. Christopher Nolan's next movie, Inception, was shown a little more love at that year's Oscar ceremony, begrudging as it felt, and did get nominated for best picture.

So when the sequel to the movie that switched things up in the first place was announced, everyone naturally wondered what kind of Oscar talk it would get upon release. Early press screenings told of standing ovations, tears, and best picture murmurings. Wide release reactions, though, weren't as unanimous as Dark Knight's  (for reasons that are worthy of their own sociology essay, in my book) and reactions at a recent academy screening were described as quiet and reaction-less.

What I'm here to say is that, by all indications, The Dark Knight Rises probably won't be nominated for best picture (and certainly won't win it) and how much acknowledgement it receives in other categories is uncertain, depending on the caliber of movies released around Oscar season.

I don't know why but I've always felt the academy doesn't care much for Christopher Nolan. They have yet to give him a directing nod for any of the great works he's turned in, and when they do nominate his movies for anything, it always feels forced and reluctant.

Maybe it's because he doesn't exactly make movies that appeal only to the sensibilities of the academy, the majority of which are older, white men (is there any other kind of top-tier society in the U.S.?),  but it seems like any reason they can find to dismiss him, they exploit it. The fact that The Dark Knight was the story of a man dressed in a batsuit seemed to be a big write-off, and that's obviously not going to change with Rises. And because the haters have made it their mission in life to point out nothing but the numerous plot holes in the movie, the academy has gotten all they need to completely ignore The Dark Knight Rises for consideration.

And you know what? I'm kind of ok with it. After these past couple years, unless they change their tune, I'm fucking done with the Oscars. Time and time again they've showed that they aren't representative of the best of what cinema has to offer in any given year. Rather, they are so very representative of which movies pander most to their core voter demographic and which bloated producer can pour the most money into campaigning. It's become a total jerk-off fest and to get your hopes up for a great movie to be nominated, much less the best movie out of all the nominees to win, is completely futile at this point.

The Dark Knight Rises is more moving, inspiring and engaging than any movie that's won best picture since No Country for Old Men (a movie that actually had polarizing reactions). The movies since then have been mostly bland and designed not to stir any thoughtful or dissenting reactions outside of "That was good. Why wouldn't it win best picture?". Purely and simply, they're fluff.

The fans of The Dark Knight Rises should be perfectly satisfied knowing that Nolan delivered a great and epic finale that, in some unique ways, is better than it's predecessors, regardless of what a cult of stuck up old people think about it. And the non-fans, well, like I said... sociology essay.

THE DARK KNIGHT RISES REVIEW

Sometimes controversy is good. Sometimes there are movies where practically everyone is in total agreement of its quality and sometimes there are movies where you're not likely to find two similar opinions sitting next to each other. It's been known to happen in movie series before. 2008's The Dark Knight is the former and 2012's The Dark Knight Rises is the latter. 

Eight years after covering up Harvey "Two Face" Dent's less than shining activities for the sake of keeping the streets clean, Gotham is now virtually crime-free and the Batman has disappeared. Bruce Wayne has allowed his pain, both physical and spiritual, to hold him back from the world. But after a run-in with a particular cat burglar, sinister, city destroying plans arise involving the masked mercenary Bane and his underground army. Does the dark knight have it in him to rise above his lowest despair and save Gotham from absolute death?

Many people, like myself, adore The Dark Knight and put it on a pedestal of greatness. Good for The Dark Knight, bad for the expectations it creates for The Dark Knight Rises. That was always going to be something that would draw weightless criticism from fans and audiences. When the previous movie is just that amazing, an undeniable fraction of people were expecting (maybe even wanting) to be disappointed that this one wasn't as revolutionary or, in some cases, wasn't the best movie ever made.

The Dark Knight Rises isn't a perfect movie and it's not as ground-breaking and legendary as its predecessor, but it is a smart, riveting, and sophisticated blockbuster that cements the Dark Knight trilogy as one of the greatest ever.

The reason so many people have such potently positive reactions to this series, as opposed to just any action blockbuster, is that they are high quality entertainment. Christopher Nolan never plays to the dumbest part of the audience, crafting dark, philosophical and multi-layered stories with characters you want to invest in. He cares about story as much as he does blowing shit up and assumes the audience does too. 

The dialogue is on another level, the seriousness is to the point of having a panic attack, and the themes are timely and thought provoking. There's nothing quite like watching the finished product of a master story-teller, especially one of Nolan's classy caliber.

Of course, the story can only succeed so far without the players to bring it to life. Make no mistake, just like Begins and Knight, the cast brings their A-game for this final outing.

He was great in Begins but Rises hosts Christian Bale's best performance as Bruce Wayne/Batman. Watching him run this gauntlet of pain and failure to hope and triumph, solidifying his heroism, is inspiring and reaches true Batman mythology levels, with the least divide between the character's two halves. Which also means the voice is more controlled. Yay.           

Michael Cain, Morgan Freeman, and Gary Oldman are great as ever as Bruce's support group with Alfred getting the most heart-felt moments that have been waiting in the wings since the very first movie.

Anne Hathaway as Catwoman (never referred to as anyone but Selina Kyle), portrayed here as a classic grifter and con-woman, doesn't share every single detail with her comic book iteration, but gets to the true essence of that character and it fits right in with this universe. Hathaway gives a great performance as what is most likely the iconic Catwoman performance.

Tom Hardy owns as Bane. The guy has swag. Not only that, he has calmness, intimidation, brutality, and (thanks to more backstory than any other villain in this series) occasional sympathy. Bringing all that across with only his eyes and ADR'd voice is a true feat. His villainous monologues are epic and there are times when even that nightmarish muzzle can't hide the fun Hardy's having with the role.

"You merely adopted the darkness. I was born in it."

[Note: The dubbing for Bane's voice in the opening scene has been reworked and I fucking hate it. In the original scene that showed in front of Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol back in December, Bane was difficult to understand but had a very creepy subdued vibe that he talks with for most of the movie. Now it sounds like a completely different, over the top voice that, while crystal clear, has no character to it. Really not how I wanted to start the movie.]

These movies will always be held up by their stories and cast members but the technical wizardry at work don't hurt none either, Jeb. Wally Pfister's cinematography is almost as much of a star as any of the cast and in IMAX, the images are earth shattering (seriously, go see it in IMAX -- it's worth every penny). The production design that's always one foot from reality has been consistently cool when it comes to the vehicles, and the aerial vehicle, The Bat, is the most kick-ass of the bunch. Even the fight coordinator gets to shine because holy shit are those fights between Batman and Bane a gut punch.

  
Because The Dark Knight Rises is such a beast of a movie at 2 hours - 45 minutes and has so much to tell, in order to keep the vehicle moving, some corners had to be cut. Some stray lines didn't get punched up, quick fixes happen a couple of times, and the slightly more fantastical plot elements will require more suspension of disbelief for some.

The film is not as tightly paced as the first two. The first hour is entertaining enough and puts the pieces in place but is also clunky and maybe a little too heavy on exposition without concise placement. 

Act two is slower and more dismal, but there's something about the darkness that wickedly sucks you in because you want to see how hopeless things get before the titular rising happens. (I was debating with myself early on whether this was the darkest of the three. Bane seemed to have caught on and gave me my answer when he hung those guys from the bridge. Well done.)

The first two acts are always good and fun but rarely great. But it becomes clear that they were necessary evil in order to ratchet up the stakes and deliver one hell of a third act. The final 45 minutes is one of the most massive, breathtaking, awe inspiring, edge of your seat and emotionally satisfying finales ever put on film. Not just for the movie itself, but for the entire Dark Knight trilogy. Everyone, from the director, the cast, the award worthy cinematography, the production design, the sound design, to Hans Zimmer's intense soundtrack, is firing on all cylinders to deliver the best possible ending to this great story. It's here where we truly see the care that's added to the spectacle. The end very much justifies the means.

  

Like I said, sometimes a certain type of controversy is good because it means discussion. If any movie series deserves to be discussed for a long time it's this one. The Dark Knight Rises is ambitious in both story and production, and though it may creak here and there, it is a cut above the rest and a great ending to an epic trilogy we both needed and deserved.

9/10

THE DARK KNIGHT RISES SCORE (HANS ZIMMER) REVIEW

Almost as exciting and beloved as the movies themselves, the Dark Knight scores by Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard are easily one of the most anticipated events that accompany these films when they hit screens. Howard chose to sit part 3 out, not wanting interject himself into the stronger work relationship Nolan and Zimmer developed during Inception, so now all weight rest on Zimmer's shoulders. Needless to say, it is now clear what a standalone Zimmer/Batman score sounds like.

Heavy in the brawn department, Zimmer's score to The Dark Knight Rises is often a freight train to your senses; a metaphorical piece of massive shrapnel blowing your cranium to pieces. And that is absolutely what he does best. Very few action scores reach the levels of pulse-pounding, "get up and kick something" excitement quite like his. Incorporating massive kettle drums and thousands of voices chanting in Moroccan reaches a base level in mankind's instinctual aggressiveness that could be described as near-genius for the result it is going for. This is likely the best action music that will be released all year.

Just like so many of his recent scores, the highlights of Zimmer's albums are the newly written material. "Gotham's Reckoning" is the most thrilling track on the disc, accompanying one of the most thrilling scenes in the movie. The music boiling underneath for the first half before it suddenly explodes into chaotic villainy for the second half is fantastic to listen to. I still can't get enough of Bane's theme.

"Mind If I Cut In?" is an interesting change of style from the rest of the album. The slinky, ambiguous piano melody can only be referring to Miss Selina Kyle/ Catwoman. Admittedly, I've already heard a somewhat similar musical concept to what Zimmer is doing here with his other recent screen femme-fatal, Irene Adler of Sherlock Holmes, but the mystery and intrigue of this track fits very nicely with what that character brings.

"Underground Army" is like something straight out of Tron or even Inception. The metronomic pulse of the synth pushes the whole foreboding and seething track along.

There is also a new theme introduced at the ends of "The Fire Rises" and "Imagine the Fire", as well as in a much slower, somber form in "Necessary Evil", that speaks of the incredible grimness and evil that will unfurl at certain parts in the film.

Those are, in a nutshell, the reasons this disc is ultimately worthwhile. It has some other great action tracks like "Fear Will Find You", in addition to "The Fire Rises" and "Imagine the Fire", but they all speak to the biggest downfall of this production: far too much of it is recycled material.

So many tracks are just been there, done that. And I don't mean "I've heard that part before". I mean "I've heard that before, played the exact same way, at the exact same volume, with the same instruments playing, and why is it taking up nearly half this album". The final track, "Rise", is seven minutes of stuff I've heard on, not one, but two previous albums. This is something Zimmer has been doing lately on his sequel scores, Dark Knight included, and much as I'd like to give it a pass for keeping in line with the previous movies, I can't help but feel just a little gypped once again.

There is also no reasonable excuse that two out of the fifteen tracks present, "A Storm is Coming" and "Death by Exile", are close to 30 seconds or less, with nothing really happening in them.

Not that I like to dwell on what could have been, but it would have been interesting to hear what Howard would have contributed to this final movie. His contributions to the previous movies brought a real emotional core to contrast Zimmer's aggression. Zimmer does provide some melancholy sections, notably "On Thin Ice", but his droning, murky fog musical approach to the more complex emotions isn't quite as satisfying as some of the best of what Howard has to offer.

The music will, no doubt, fit like a glove when played with the movie (it always has), but for anyone who has the score to Batman Begins &/or The Dark Knight sitting on their shelf, you may be feeling a little deja-vu with Rises. The new material is what makes this album worthwhile and that encapsulates about half of it, so choose for yourself whether you want the whole thing or whether you just want to pick and choose certain tracks. Just don't be surprised if you catch yourself mouthing "Deshay, Deshay, Basara, Basara" for the next few weeks.

3.5/5

5 THINGS I WANT IN AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2

I really liked Amazing Spider-Man and from what I understand, I am in the majority to a very vocal minority. One of the things I liked most about it is that it sets up for what could be a spectacular sequel, one that I will naturally have higher expectations for. Here are some things I would like to see to reaffirm that this trilogy is on the right track.

1. Matured Peter Parker

At the end of the movie, Flash Thompson tells Peter "you're coming along, Parker". I hope I'll continue to agree with that in the future. One of the criticisms Spidey has faced this time around (one I think is being overblown) is that Peter Parker can, at times, be a bit dickish. I would say that, at times, Spider-Man's signature snark does indeed seep into Peter's personality, but I'm still good with it for a first movie. 

More than ever, Spider-Man feels like a real person under the costume this time. They didn't just drop him into superhero-dom, but are allowing him to grow into it. As time goes by, he should naturally progress into the bearer of responsibility we know him as.

That in no way means his Spider-Man persona needs to change. That was just fine, as is. What should change is that Peter will hopefully reach a point where he doesn't yell at his Aunt May to go to sleep, tell Gwen to shut up, mid-make-out, and be so quick to start arguments with the chief of police. Stuff like that can exit any time.

2. J. Jonah Jameson  

One of the two biggest casting challenges for next time will be the editor-in-chief of The Daily Bugle. J.K. Simmons so perfectly portrayed that character in the previous movies that it's a hurdle enough to try and imagine anyone else filling that character's shoes. If they don't pick someone who already practically embodies that character, then whomever they do chose is going to have to step up their game to deliver as memorable a performance.

3. The Osborns

Speaking of shoes to fill, the Spider-Man universe's most dysfunctional family requires special attention. Craftily introduced as a looming presence behind the curtain here, Norman Osborn's revealing should arrive in part 2. All signs point to Osborn having a significant role in the disappearance of Peter's parents, which should provide some interesting twists and turns in the overarching story. Whether his maniacal alter-ego, the Green Goblin, should feature prominently in the sequel is debatable, but the more build up he gets the better.

While we're talking about one Osborn it may be prudent to mention the other. Since Harry's descent into revenge was the overarching story of the previous trilogy, it doesn't seem at all necessary to revisit it again here. However,  Harry's involvement in Peter's life isn't insignificant enough that he should be left out, either.

4. Artist Control

One thing that uncomfortably reminded me of Spider-Man 1 & 3 is that Amazing Spider-Man is not the baby of the director or the writer. It is Sony's/Columbia's product, above everything else. They, no doubt, had the last word for everything that happened in the movie, with the predetermined laundry-list of requirements for the movie in hand. 

Webb and Vanderbilt were still able to put enough of their stamp on it by the time it hit theaters, luckily. Next time around the leash should be loosened quite a bit, if the studio knows what's best for the movie. How many big superhero sequels have turned out to be great because the studios entrusted more control to the director (Spider-Man 2, The Dark Knight, X2, X-Men: First Class) and how many have tripped up because the head honchos wouldn't give any slack (Iron Man 2, Spider-Man 3, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance). 

Allow Webb and whichever writer ends up with the biggest input to take the story where it naturally needs to go, instead of dictating action plot points that don't gel with what's going on in the story.

5. Different Villain Set

It's not like the mad scientist run rampant (who also happens to be one of Peter's father figures) is a bad villain archetype, but to say it's been done in these movies is an understatement. 

It's perfectly alright to have one or two side villains that don't have a personal connection to Peter in some way (for once). A technologically or biologically enhanced criminal or enforcer on the side could make for some great action scenes. Someone like Mysterio, Shocker, Sandman (minus the Uncle Ben drama), or Electro could all fill this role.

If this iteration of Spider-Man wants to draw more comparisons to Nolan's Batman movies, organized crime is an area no Spider-Man film has touched before. I'm not sure of the current legal status of using Kingpin due to him being declared part of the Daredevil universe, but anyone from Tombstone, Silvermane, or Hammerhead could fill the crime boss role, and maybe even be the employer of the supercriminals previously mentioned.

This is the area of the Spider-Man movie universe that now needs the most mixing up, so practically any change will be welcomed.

SAVAGES REVIEW

Oliver Stone -- he's a weird guy. Basically insane at one point and possibly still is depending on who you ask. Like his sanity, his batting average as a filmmaker in these last few years has been a little spotty too. If W. and Wall Street 2 weren't considered successes, Savages may just be seen as a step in the right direction.


Stone has become known for this nutty expressionist style of filmmaking consisting of color saturation and crazy editing (among other things) that he adopted back when he did Natural Born Killers. With a topic as tumultuous and frantic as the war on drugs, splicing in an image of the Buddha now and then doesn't seem so out there, and such things even bring interest to a lot of parts. 


Savages acts primarily as a broad (and gratuitous) statement about the state of the U.S.'s war on drugs. Like it needs to tell you that it's failed. The film takes a very adamant stance that decriminalizing marijuana would eliminate most the violence and power of the cartels. Make of that what you will, but not in my comments section, because I'm not going near it.

But in focusing on the conditions of this conflict, the movie kind of bypasses telling an involving story. None of the main three characters ever seemed all that interesting. The actors all pulled their weight when they had to but there was never much heft or involvement with them.

Add to that a script that's incredibly obvious and hokey. Poor Blake Lively had to deliver a narrative that thinks it's funnier and more ironic than it actually is. If the line "I had orgasms, he had wargasms." sounds only mildly amusing, don't worry, it comes off as the most awkward thing ever in the movie. It also seems as if the writers assumed people would forget what movie they are seeing and made sure to put the word "Savages" in the movie no less than five times, with Lively reading the fucking definition at one point. Yeesh.

The ending is likely to leave a lot of people dumbfounded as to why they would even choose to go down the road they do. Without giving too much away, it's frivolous.

The real reason to see this movie is the veteran actors in the supporting cast. They are the ones who know what they are in for and just how to go about their business. Salma Hayek chews scenery like a boss and the great Benicio del Toro is one of the most enjoyably scumbaggish villains this summer. Even John Travolta is a lot of fun as a morally ambiguous DEA agent. The exuberance from these guys is what grabs hold of your attention, unfortunately at the expense of the main characters story.

Like a lot of movies this summer, it's refreshing to see Savages embrace its R rating. Basically nothing but sex happens for the first 15 minutes of the movie. After that, the drugs and violence really sets in and there's a particularly upsetting scene of torture. Not to say that any of these things could be described as soul food, just that so many movies in the summer shy away from gritty graphic content in an attempt to be accessible to as many people as possible, even if it doesn't gel with the movie.

Inconsistencies and script aside, Savages works in the long run, but only because of the strength of the supporting players and because the topic proves to be so fascinating.

6/10

SOMETHING IS MISSING FROM THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN

SPOILERS BELOW FOR ANYONE WHO HASN'T SEEN "ASM"

Advertised as "The Untold Story" of Spider-Man, many people were disappointed that the story they got with The Amazing Spider-Man was, well, somewhat told. The newest element, the mystery of Peter's parents, wasn't resolved by the end of the movie, although it was teased to have some importance in upcoming sequels. Now word is surfacing that this may not have always been the case.

One scene in specific does not appear in the movie and it may have made for a very different movie. The scene in question has made several snippet appearances in the marketing material before-hand, so much so that its absence draws a lot of attention. The general idea of the scene looks to involve Peter confronting Dr. Connors in his sewer laboratory after the fight in the high school when Rajit Ratha, Connors' superior and Norman Osborn underling, also confronts him, which ends in more reptilian results.

It is 99% certain that the two lines we've already heard in the trailers, first by Dr. Ratha where he asks Peter "Do you think what happened to you, Peter, was an accident? Do you have any idea what you really are?" and the line where Dr. Connors says "If you want the truth Peter, come and get it." (both of which are not in the movie) are contained in this scene.

Judging just by those two lines, it seems incredibly likely that if this scene didn't flat out reveal the mystery of Peter's parents, then it would have led on to the idea that there is something special about Peter that allowed him to survive his genetic enhancement where all other specimens died. It seems probable considering Richard Parker's genetic work with spiders that he played a role in Peter's genetic luck with the spider bite.

There is also some evidence that the end of this scene would have led into The Lizard transforming the SWAT team into lizards, which is rumored to have originally played a larger role in the story than it did. The editing of the movie seems pretty telltale of re-shoots.

Whether they cut this scene because they wanted to save their answers for next time, test audiences didn't like it, or it made the movie too long, the inclusion of this scene, I think, would have made it a better movie. Not only would it have been that one extra Lizard scene the movie needed, it also closes the Ratha plot-hole (things don't seem to end well for him, judging by one of those photos and how whispery he delivers that cut line). In fact, one could say all story related issues stem from the consequences of removing of this scene.

Now, I still really like the movie. I think it works great as a character piece with some terrific performances, humor and action/special effects. But after learning about this, it's hard not to find more fault with the story. And as much as I would love for this scene to be included in the deleted scenes on the Blu-Ray, or even better, be part of an extended cut, something tells me Sony doesn't want this to see daylight (which is weird seeing how they released so much evidence of it).

Oh well. Just another behind the scenes tale about the magic of movie making.

THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN REVIEW

I couldn't give less of a flying fuck if it's been just 5 years since the original Spider-Man trilogy ended. It's now become clear as crystal that those movies were not the best way to be introduced to the character. In fact, forget all about them. The Amazing Spider-Man is the Spider-Man movie we both needed and deserved all along.

The Amazing Spider-Man sees social outcast and orphan Peter Parker on the hunt for answers about his parents, who went missing when he was a child. His search brings him to the lab of Oscorp scientist Dr. Curt Conners when a chance encounter with a genetically altered spider grants him extraordinary abilities. Donning the alter ego of Spider-Man, Peter woos his high school crush, Gwen Stacy, while realizing he inadvertently gives Dr. Connors the tools to become a mutated monster.

This movie's main criticism has been that it retells the origin story. If you were satisfied with it the first time around, you may find yourself a little bugged you have to revisit it here. If you're of the correct opinion that barely anything about Spider-Man (2002) was resonant, origin included, you'll be pleased to know that it is told here in a way that is both more integral to the overall movie and helps relate to the characters even more. In other words, better in every way.

This movie is very different from what has come before. People have lazily said that this movie is trying to be the Dark Knight version of Spider-Man. Yes and no.

Yes, in that gone is the whimsical fluff of the previous movies. Amazing Spider-Man has more of an edge to it and is a few steps closer to reality. That's not to say that in this version the Lizard is a guy who has a really bad case of eczema, just that the real world things in it seem definitely more real world.

No, in that this is still Spider-Man. Director Marc Webb brings a great sense of humor to the movie, akin to his last movie, (500) Days of Summer, and it feels very at home with these characters (and certainly not overly corny). The scenes where he first discovers his powers are about as funny as any great comedic scene you'll see this summer.

Many people may be surprised and maybe even disappointed to learn that this movie values the characters and their relationships most of all. It's not paced like a regular summer movie, opting to build up to most of its action in the last 45 minutes, and while that does create some problems in the form of a couple of really slow parts, the characters were engrossing enough to keep my attention.

Andrew Garfield embodies so much of what makes not only Spider-Man great, but Peter Parker as well. Instead of being a shy outcast who felt at home in the '60s, like in the last series, this Peter Parker is an outsider that fits in current day. He's dorky and awkward but he also rides a skateboard and has some abandonment issues. At times, it's almost as if he has Aspergers.  He loves his Uncle Ben but doesn't quite take the leap into full responsibility as Spider-Man yet. And why would he? He's a high school student still trying to find his own way through things. Having such a real, dimensional character to root for this time is awesome and Garfield's performance is a great anchor for the movie.

Who honestly doesn't like Emma Stone at this point? This isn't her being that full on smarmy and sarcastic self she's known for, but she is SO incredibly likeable, especially when compared to her predecessor. Her scenes with Garfield are what keep the movie afloat.

Rhys Ifans is a great actor and he turns in a good performance here, but The Lizard isn't one of the things that is great about the movie.  Essentially, he is a perfect villain to begin your proposed trilogy with because he cribs from the best and most familiar Spider-Man villains: eccentric scientist who is a role model of Peter's goes loopy after a botched laboratory turns him into a monster. I'm sure that doesn't sound familiar. The all-CG design of The Lizard looks great most of the time and it was a smart decision to incorporate Ifans' voice and mannerisms. However, just one more scene with him would make him seem more integral to the whole thing and he would probably be a great villain instead of just a good one.

Not in the movie, FYI

Many blockbusters have starting thinking more in terms of a long term franchise and it seems Spider-Man has now succumbed as well. That's not a good thing. Many elements are left unresolved at the end of the movie. The mystery about Peter's parents isn't solved, Uncle Ben's killer is never caught, and the Dr. Ratha character completely disappears after the bridge scene (likely edited out, judging by stills and sound bites already released). The first two aren't so bad, seeing as the movie got to where it needed to because of their inclusion, but the third hints at some missing material that may have taken the story in a different direction.

Worse, there is a stinger half way through the credits that hints at answers to the parents mystery, along with a likely villain next time. While it's enjoyable to ponder who this mystery figure is, and I very much look forward to how they go forth with this series, the scene makes it too clear that this movie can't stand completely by itself because of all the loose ends.

Still, once the action kicks in in the last 45 minutes, it becomes some of the most fun in all of the Spider-Man movies. Spidey's battles with The Lizard at the high school and on top of the Oscorp tower are thrilling and gritty. The swinging sequences, despite not having the advantage of being fresh and new, still pop off the screen, and just about every special effect that looked horrible before looks Amazing now.

It took me a while to warm up to it, but James Horner's score works fantastically in the movie and could possibly rival Elfman's on the icon-o-meter.

Spider-Man is such an iconic character that means so much to so many different people that it's become impossible to please everybody. Many (supposedly) professional critics decided to hate this movie from the start because of its genesis. Yes, this movie was made so Sony could retain the rights to the character and keep public awareness up. That being this case, it's some kind of miracle that this movie ended up as good as it did. This is a more realized, well balanced version of Spider-Man. Sure, the quips, the iconic Spider-Man poses and the mechanical web-shooters make a welcome return, but finding what makes these characters tick and showing all the great aspects of them is what sets this movie above the rest. If you consider yourself very attached to the previous movies, your reaction may differ, but The Amazing Spider-Man proves to be on another level from what has come before and a welcome big screen return for the wallcrawler.

7.5/10

SPIDERAMA!!!: SPIDER-MAN 3 REVIEW

I'm so very happy that this marvelous, flawless series of movies could go out on such a high note, uniting fans and critics, worldwide, into a consensus that the Spider-Man trilogy only got better with every movie and is one of the best trilogies of all time. (Comes down from absinthe high, realizes the horror of the situation, opts to drink more absinthe). 

Spider-Man 3 sees Peter Parker living the good life: the public has embraced Spider-Man as a hero and he's finally got the girl, who he now intends to propose to. But a big clusterfuck of trouble is brewing. His friend Harry is gunning for him, using his father's Goblin gear and a strange black, alien goo has attached itself to him, enhancing his powers and rage. Which is convenient since he's going through some personal issues after finding out Flint Marko a.k.a Sandman is the real killer of his uncle Ben. If I listed the billion other things that happen, this synopsis would be as long as the movie.

Two things need to be made clear before we proceed:

1. This is not a good movie
2. I know it's not the popular thing, but I don't really hate Spider-Man 3

People tend to act like Spider-Man 3 is some crazy curveball out of left field. It's not. Spider-Man 3 is the natural progression of all the bad things established in the original Spider-Man come to a head, almost as if Spider-Man 2 was the fluke. Ridiculously corny lines, camera shots and music montages involving pelvic thrusts. Characters bursting into ugly crying every twenty minutes for no believable reason. Lack of general narrative focus. They all peeked through in the first two movies and have overtaken part 3 like a virus, and are ultimately what people will remember most about this movie.

Spider-Man 3 crams so much frickin' material in that it reaches the point where everything becomes diluted and unsatisfying.

Their biggest mistake was to introduce the black suit and Venom. Let it be known that I've never joined the Venom fanboy train. That character is essentially a bigger, badder version of Spider-Man and not much more; not very innovative and not a terribly creative final threat to introduce at the very end of your trilogy.

In all the history of overlong, indulgent and baggage carrying comic book stories, the Symbiote/Venom storyline is one that belongs in a museum for people to ogle at and wonder. So, even with the revision that the goo just happened to land in meteor nearby Peter and MJ, as opposed to getting the black suit in this crazy-ass superhero war in outer space, there's still too much to cover (satisfyingly) in one movie.

Complicating matters is the inclusion of Sandman. With Doc Ock, it was ok to create some back story that gives Peter a personal connection to him because he was one of about three things that was happening in Spider-Man 2. With Sandman, it's another forced layer of complexity and the revelation that he only does bad because his little daughter is dying comes off as just one more cheap ploy. With two villains that already share a major personal connection with Spider-Man, it wouldn't have been a bad idea to have Sandman be a minor villain who just does villainous shit.

The love triangle, or hexagon, or whatever the fuck it is, paints the characters, especially Mary Jane, in a really unflattering light. If these dummies would just talk to each other and not act like pouty children there wouldn't be all this unnecessary conflict. Gwen Stacy is introduced for no real reason other than to be another arguing point for Peter and MJ, while tying her to Eddie Brock doesn't succeed in making her any more relevant.

The only storyline that reaches satisfying(ish) levels is Harry's. They finally came to the conclusion they meant for at the end of the saga, but not without its bumps and bruises. Having Harry get amnesia for a good hour of the movie is just a little too convenient of a way to shift the focus away from him, while showing his happy-go-lucky side in order to re-endear us to him. And throwing him into the love traingle shape(?) lion pit again, brief as it may be, is too familiar and taxing. But, I will dole out some respect for Raimi and co. for deciding to send him out in the way that makes the most sense and delivers (what should have been) the biggest emotional impact.

Spider-Man stands in awe of the massive problems 

The reason this movie isn't a complete loss for me is the action set pieces. Much of my enjoyment of these movies rests on them and this is one of few things Spider-Man 3 delivers on. The visual effects are finally up to a point where I still think they look good by today's standards. The Sandman opened the door for some unique effects (along with physics quandaries) and the symbiote looked and felt legitimately alive.  Likewise, all the fights are staged to perfection, giving us the most adrenaline-fueled climax of all three.

As weird as it sounds, I dug the atmosphere of 3. The cinematography, music and editing all made it feel like a Spider-Man movie should. I felt they gave it a distinctive identity this time around. It's just a shame these great visual assets came with a movie so flawed in content.

I can stomach this movie more than others, it would seem, but it doesn't change the fact that Spider-Man 3 is a cautionary tale. Beware of studios influence, trying to cram in extra villains. Beware of over reaching with your story-telling capabilities. Beware of going overboard on your directorial quirks. And most of all, beware of fucking up on the third entry and inciting the ire of fans everywhere. God, I don't know how long I could go on in this world if The Dark Knight Rises submits to the threequel curse.

5.5/10

BRAVE & ABRAHAM LINCOLN: VAMPIRE HUNTER DOUBLE REVIEW

Expectations can be a weird thing when it comes to movies: they can either serve you from being mostly absent or betray you from being too present. Incidentally, they played a role in this week's two biggest releases, both of which combine to make one of the strangest, most entertaining double features I've ever seen.

BRAVE

Pixar has become known, especially in these past few years, for delivering sophisticated, beautifully animated movies that appeal not only to kids, but almost every demographic that sees them. The original title of Brave was The Bear and The Bow. While Brave is a blunt title that hints at some kind of complexity under the surface, The Bear and the Bow would have been a more suitable title that gives a more honest idea of how simple this movie really is.

Yes, most of Brave's story is focused around a plot twist that made me go, "That's all there is to it, huh." I knew from the trailers that the main character, Merida, would ask for a spell that would change her fate but I was sort of assuming it would lead to history being re-written in some way, and all of them ending up in "the darkest timeline". Yeah, shame on me to try and expect where the plot is going.

(SPOILER ALERT) As it turns out, the witch she goes to gives her a cake that transforms her demanding, traditional mother, the queen, into a bear. Now Merida and her mother must go to get the spell removed, tiptoe around her father, who is obsessed with killing bears after one devoured his leg and repair their rocky bond as mother and daughter.

That's the kind of movie this is. It wants to feature a big dose of slapstick comedy over subtlety or a strong message throughout. And that's fine. I can't say I was never amused by the humor; I found myself chuckling a lot at the queen acting out her proper mannerisms in bear form, and the mischief of the triplet brothers. But that sort of thing is not what Pixar has been known to rely on and makes it seem like a lesser movie. Worse, the first half hour of introducing the characters and situations sets it up as what we've come to expect from the better of previous Pixar movies, making the switch more jarring and unwanted.

But this is, indeed, a Disney/Pixar movie we're talking about. Even on efforts that don't knock it out of the park, they feature some of the most swooningly gorgeous animation ever seen, reaching almost photo-realistic levels. The vocal performances remain great and help to enhance already likable, interesting characters. And Brave continues the trend of great music in Pixar films. Patrick Doyle's score, along with Julie Fowlis' songs, gives the movie its heart and the requisite amount of Scottish flavor (Not like haggis, though. That would be terrible).

It's interesting to point out that not only does this Disney movie feature the first examining of a mother-daughter relationship, the sweetest and most resonant aspect of the movie, but has both parents alive and well in the first place! Ah, progress.

Maybe it's me, but I like my movies to have antagonists. Brave could have used one instead of just a big obstacle at the end.

Brave is a sweet, funny, family tale wrapped in the wonderful sights and sounds of Scotland. But with Pixar, you come to expect something that isn't quite as juvenile in its focus. As is, it's a completely acceptable and heartfelt, if weightless, romp.

7/10

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

The POTUS is a complete badass, and the South is a land full of soulless bloodsuckers, slowly draining the life out of everything in their path. Also, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is out this week.

I kid, and so does Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, albeit with a straighter face. With such a blatantly silly concept, I was a little surprised/concerned when I saw the first footage and realized how serious they were taking the material. It seemed like clear enough evidence that this movie would be a chore to stomach. I was wrong.

AL: VH is the best of what B-movies have to offer. It's sleek, stylish, violent, tongue-in-cheek, and fun. More importantly, it's entirely watchable, which, for a while there, is more than I was expecting.

Through some strange twist of fate, the seriousness with which this is all treated makes it even more silly and amusing. I cannot properly describe the utter glee I found watching the actors go from reciting their terrible dialogue with a straight face to butchering vampires in slow and fast motion set to Henry Jackman's pounding score in the background.

Now, keep in mind this is clearly a B-movie. Translation: hokey premise, terrible dialogue, one note characters, bad special effects, plot holes and inconsistencies, and possible self-important lines that have no business here. But that much should have been obvious just from the title.

Surprisingly, none of the actors are "stand out" bad or hamming it up. Usually there's at least one who goes all out Nic Cage, but everyone present keeps it in line.

I'm not a huge fan of gratuitous slow-mo but I can accept it here because director Timur Bekmambetov crafts some slick and entertaining set pieces that don't rely entirely on it because they are generally well staged. Lincoln's axe-fu brings some impressive kills and the horse stampede scene, despite the CGI looking like ass, is a blast.

More-so than a period piece, this looks and feels even more like a genuine vampire movie. The look of the un-dead is pale, veiny, vicious, nasty and all around menacing. The white house is often immersed in thick fog, with moonlight and candles shining through the haze. A flock of bats swoop overhead while our heroes try to escape a horde of vamps in the Louisiana baillou. Stuff like this is what gives AL: VH its flavor.

  

The movie incorporates much of the real life story of Lincoln and that's when parts of the 1hr 45min runtime can stretch on, but throughout most of it they do a good job of interspersing historical drama with vampiric dismemberment equally. Only in the second half is there a prolonged break.

It would be so easy for them to slip up with this movie and make it dull, but goddamn if I didn't have a lot of fun with it. It was never going to shoot for high marks on story or characters, but it's got such a great visual style and cool action bits that it became so much more fun and enjoyable than what I was expecting. And that's what kitschy, silly movies with names like Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter need to be.

7/10