Jumanji (1995) Fun Movie, the Re-Watch Was Not Bad

Jumanji (1995)

In light of recent events, many people have been re-watching Robin Williams content from over the years. Robin Williams was very talented, but most of the time I did not prefer his comedy style. I decided to watch this film last night because I wanted to see something light hearted. After a long day of work and the stress of life, seeing an easy to watch film helps the night wind down.

The movie itself features the story of a boy who is punished by the decisions he makes as a child. His actions lead to him getting beat up by bullies for his name sake, getting a man fired from the factory, and sent away to boarding school. Now I will agree that not all of these things are in his control and his actions are not different than expected for a child of his age. In fact, I enjoy the beginning of this film because it’s a way to teach people about the gravity of their actions even at a young age.

The premise of this film is very odd because you start out with some dramatic irony. You know that the game is bewitched, but you don’t know anything about the previous players that were determined to get rid of it. You know they lived in the 1860’s and besides the civil war going on, there was not much for a young man to get interested in… Now this is a harsh criticism for a film that was has a target audience of 10 years of age. The important part is that curiosity leads to adventure.

The adventure for the character of Robin Williams seems a bit unfair compared to the rest of the plagues in the game. Helen Hunt had to continue playing the game in order for him to return. My real question is how he survived the jungle for 26 years at such a young age with little to no skills to speak of. Either way Robin Williams portrays a great comedic character that still hasn’t reached manhood and only wants to see his family when he returns. He is able to connect with the children easily because of this fact and it allows them to create several layers to their relationship.

Analytic arguments aside, Jumanji is fun to watch even so long after the years when I saw this in theaters. I have to train myself to not over think these types of movies. I really spend a large amount of time wondering how Robin Williams never noticed that Van Pelt (the hunter) looked exactly like his father or if it was meant to be symbolic of his father slaying his dreams. That would be a hard reality to face for 26 years in the jungle, having the only other human connection being your father and he trying to kill you. 

Sometimes I also wonder about them just simultaneously releasing a movie about a board game in order to make money off of an actual board game. It wouldn't be the first time it has happened. When it first came out I remember it was like $20 and only my rich friends could afford that. Is it a movie about a man and his relationship with his father, or a promotional tool to test the waters with movie products. 

300: A Film Made Without Consequence or Responsibility

300: Rise of an Empire

It doesn't take long to remind yourself why you both love and hate 300. You both love and hate the ridiculousness of the battles. How a man can fight five against one easily. How a woman can cut a mans throat, then the back of his head and take it clean off with just a knife. It would seem ridiculous for a strong woman or man to be able to throw a head (13 pounds)  sideways over 20 feet without even looking in that general direction, but these types of acts are just part of the illusion of strength made by this film. I will say that over the course of history that ancient people were stronger (minus nutrition details) due to the fact that many of them worked in trades demanding strength of body. These are also trades that we would not suffer as a people today.

I say this film is void of consequence and responsibility because it falls victim to the obvious pitfalls of a sequel. For instance...
The captain and his son is the same plot line from the first to second with different characters (that are underdeveloped).
The movie uses the legendary actions of the first to make a somewhat new plot line for the second (this is not always bad but for the most part it takes away from the present)
The main character is always far more intelligent than the audience or other characters in the film believe him to be. It's like opposite dramatic irony where the audience is left in the dark about the hero in order to make it more dramatic when he does something unpredictable. (Aka he does not appear to have any knowledge of naval warfare from the war fought 10 years previous, but is a great tactician later on.)
Character reuse is rampant and mundane. They try to use the same characters in the second that were good characters in the first except they have little development in the second.
They also have new characters to basically take the place of the old characters and never develop them except for a few lines of dialogue here and there. They want you to be emotionally invested in the character from the last movie except not he has a new face, less meaning, and you don't care if he lives or dies.
They are also unable to produce a new hero that is different from that of the first. He has all the screen time in the world, but hardly differed from Leonitus in any way. It makes for a boring version of the character Gerrard Butler made awesome.

The film does have some great one liners, but they are forced. I will say that the women characters do have great diction and delivery. I am one of those people who is saddened by the lack of strong female roles and in film and yes I do find it odd that you would find strong woman roles in a frat fest like this. Often I think these strong male oriented piss contests for movies are one of the only venues a woman can be strong in film today. I will not defend them by saying that even a small minority provide this venue. This is a recent trend in film. I can't say I feel the empowerment of women in them but I will write that I am hoping these types of women characters are used more often in film (not television) I am not saying these films are a template, but merely a stage to stand on.

The similarities between the two 300 films are enough to make them sequels but not enough to make this film independently great on its own.

It seems the director had freedom without consequence or responsibility for making a poorly written film.

Gravity (2013) This May Be The Worst Movie to Ever Win An Oscar

Gravity (2013) Warner

As the Oscars loom, I am trying to update myself with all the nominees which is why I decided to watch Gravity. It was directed by Alfonso Cuaron who subsequently directed the third Harry Potter film so I should’ve known this film was going to be a nightmare. His foreign films like “Y Tu Mama Tambien” was good, but it is also more than a decade old.  

It’s hard for me to describe in words how awful this film truly was from top to bottom. I think the only way to enhance its viewing experience is to do so smoking pot so that the cinematic visuals might actually equate to something existential rather than a waste of film. Some of the Earth shots were nice to look at, but the story is so bland and unappealing that I wanted to detach myself from the film so that I could float off into space in the opposite direction.

When Tina Fey made the joke that “George Clooney would rather float off into space and die rather than spend one more minute with a woman his own age” she wasn’t really joking. Not only is Clooney’s character forgettable, but there is no attachment whatsoever to both of the characters involved. From the beginning I wanted to pay more attention to my dog licking himself then I did caring about either character and the longer the film went on the more boring it became.

I don’t mind dramas, they are usually the best films, but to call this a drama is far from the definition of the word which is defined as “an exciting, emotional, or unexpected series of events or set of circumstances.” Not only was I not entertained by it, emotionally tied to it, I also thought the events were totally predictable. I called the accident before it happed (it was obvious), I called the part about her daughter (easy), I could see through her hallucinations in a heartbeat, and who thought she was going to die? These personal one character stories have been done before, but take into consideration that Cast Away (2000) was done with one character just like 127 Hours (2010) and both had characters you actually cared about.

The movie itself has some great visuals but the zero-gravity made me want to yack. It was the most convincing part of space besides Bullocks’ lack of knowledge about astrophysics. I am not sure how most reviewers considered this to be a masterpiece of film. This movie was not gripping, emotional, inspirational, interesting, or worth watching. Those are usually some of the themes tied to Oscar winning films.

I guess you could say that my opinion is tainted because of the fact that everyone is making a big deal out of this film, but it is not art. It is a worthless story about a woman trying to get home to nothing in particular. You don’t care about her or her journey and it feels like the entire movie is based around the zero-gravity concept they used in the cinematography. I can’t blame them for naming the movie “gravity” because that is all it was about.

Thor: The Dark World (2013) Loki Was Only Mostly Dead

Thor: The Dark World (2013) Paramount

I feel bad that I watched this movie in the same week I saw Iron Man 3 again because I feel like I was tainted from the non-logical experience of watching that film. Sometimes I feel like I am the only person looking into these films and finding fault with them. Thor 2 introduced something that I have not seen in a superhero movie in some time. It showed us his family. You probably haven’t thought about it but it is difficult to actually see a superhero interact with his own family. Not his real family anyway.

I thought about Odin and Frigga and both characters acted very similarly to earth-like parents. Odin was disappointed that Thor wanted to be with Natalie Portman and really who can blame him. She is a scientific genius that is basically butter anytime she sees muscles (real strength of character). This is a very odd combination and I think most people see the logic in Thor marrying Sif. She is more attractive, warrior minded, deeply caring for Thor, smart, selfless, honorable, fights for Asgard, saved Thors life, do I really need to go on? She is basically the perfect woman for Thor but he would rather stay with butter instead.

Again the best character in the film is Heimdall (played by Idris Elba) who makes a living by kicking ass and staying apart from the Asgardian world. He enjoys the beauty of the universe compared to that of a woman which seems like a trifle to him. He takes down an invisible warship single-handedly and is the most believable alien character.

Tom Hiddleston plays Loki once again and he is always up to his tricks as usual. He is what I would call a conundrum. He leads one of the “Kursed” away from the fighting and towards his mother whom he loves. He then had to deal with the fact that he literally helped kill the only person he cared for. He now has to live in shame because of his actions. He then signs up for the vengeance mission only to fool Thor later on that he was dead at one point and also fooled Odin which repeats the story line from the first film. He also fools the same Odin that shreds matter and is the wisest man in the entire universe. What gave away the fact that it was Loki to me in the ending scene is that he mentioned Loki when Thor brought him up. This is something that Odin would not do because he cares little for Loki after what happened on Earth and previously with the Frost Giants.

One thing I disliked was the Aether and Malekith. After seeing the power of the Aether, Bor (father of Odin) instructs a commander to “bury it deep where no one will find it.” Well they buried it on the same planet they were fighting on which is uninhabited, but within eye shot from the opening of a cave. I feel like there could be several other places better suited for this artifact even if it were in the same hole, just deeper. Thor goes after Malekith in hopes to destroy the Aether which he was told could not be destroyed by Odin. Thor tries to be noble by taking the weapon away from his home planet, but lacks a real understanding of the weapon which makes his endeavors pointless.

Malekith is an odd villain because he wishes for the world to be in darkness where he can rule and rebuild his people. The reason he wants to rid the universe of the sun is unknown, which makes him a pretty regular villain. I am just waiting for the day that Hollywood decides to write about real evil. It’s not often you see a good villain like Heath Ledgers Joker, but there should be more roles written with real evil intent rather than just universal domination.

Electoral Dysfunction (2012) Voting Is A Privilege Dummies.

Electoral Dysfunction (2012) Independent

I must say that I sometimes feel like I live on another planet when I watch these films.

I have never seen a political documentary by Mo Rocca before so I was not quite sure what to think going into it. I usually stay away from political documentaries like the plague because honestly they are never clear about the actual facts and few sources are mentioned.

I used to debate in high school and I am now highly trained to be skeptical when I hear outrageous numbers without any sort of source. I also need to know the origin of that source and what type of work they are known for in order to validate that information being real. Some sources are about as credible as a guy saying it on Facebook so it’s hard to take a lot of people seriously.   

One thing I dislike about documentaries is it usually shows extreme cases of every problem and it usually talks to a lot of people involved that have a great deal of political involvement. I dislike this because it is hard to expect many of our elected officials to be non-biased especially when it comes to the information they have. Whenever I watch a news network I see a lot of people talking about a lot of different topics and saying some pretty untrue things after I later research the topics. In a world where you cannot take things at face value, it behooves one to do the majority of the research on their own.

The movie focuses on the several nuances of laws in the state of Indiana for voting. They are all very confusing and there is no real consensus from anyone about what we should do as a country when it comes to voting laws by state and the Electoral College. Some want the government to only use the popular vote as a way to elect the president and to streamline the voting process nationally. Others want to keep the Electoral College and force people to pass a civics test in order to vote.

I really wish we were all educated correctly so that a civics test would not be needed in order to vote. Most people I have talked to are unaware that the reason we have public schools is to inform the general public about history and politics so that they can be educated in their voting behaviors. Sadly, school is not taken very seriously in many places and very few grasp the concepts when it comes to the laws of the state.

One of the things the documentary does not do well is give a consensus about what could be done to better improve the system. Instead of getting more people to talk about specific voting laws in one state, I thought it would be more interesting to see what scholars thought on the matter of the Electoral College. I guess that may not be as entertaining, but it would be fruitful.

One system I am in favor of when it comes to the Electoral College is to use what is known as a “Pro Rata” system. This would allow the states to keep their voting laws while allowing for a system that incorporates everyone non-dependent on what state they lived in. It would matter if you voted democratic in a republican state and it would matter if you voted republican in a democratic state. The election process would involve more people because it would divide the electoral votes of the state’s population based on the voting in the state. So if Colorado (with 9 electoral votes) had 55% of the general populous vote democratic and 45% vote republican, it would give 5 electoral votes to the democratic nominee and 4 electoral votes to the republican nominee. It seems like a fair system based on the fact that every vote counts, unlike how it is represented in the current system. 

Iron Man 3 (2013) Made No Sense

Iron Man 3 (2013) Paramount

An old popular plotline in superhero comics is the ‘demons from the past’ plot which never seems to get old because it allows writers to bring new villains to the forefront that have been lingering around for years. I think it is important to note that the theme of these movies often orbits around things that the protagonist could’ve done better to stop these people from rising to their evil plots. It’s somewhat a joke when you think about it because there were plenty of things that troubled these people before they became evil. It’s not the superheroes fault, but they take the blame for it like in Iron Man 3 where Stark blames himself for starting this mess. 

Aldrich Killian was supposedly thankful for Stark treating him the way he did because it allowed him to become desperate enough to become evil. His whole goal during the film is to create another war on terror where he owned the villain and somehow had the war supplies. Although it is only mentioned briefly, Killian had lots of military contracts but mostly focused on the extremis project. He didn’t really have any weapons other than the people he manipulated. In fact he was so understaffed that some of his security teams literally gave up on the spot and he had to do all the video production of the Mandarin himself as shown in a scene where he was getting different camera angles to publicly kill the President and suggests they do a technical run through first. So you basically want me to believe that not only does Killian basically work alone, but he more resources than S.H.I.E.L.D. and he is able to infiltrate government officials all by himself? He can override all television programming and get to the presidents cell phone and I guess this means I should just assume he has people on the job even though they are never to be seen on camera.

Perhaps Aldrich Killian and AIM are part of something bigger?

I am trying to suspend my disbelief, but wouldn't it be logical for the next guy in command take over after Killian is dead? Since this is such a vast organization should I also assume that other people are still in charge? Wouldn't it be pointless for Iron Man to blow up his specialized suits if there is just another imminent attack or will some other superhero actually show up when there is a terrorist threat?

(Oh btw, Killian is as bad of a name as General Grievous... so dumb) 

Besides all of the tech talk and flimsy side character story lines, the movie in it of itself seems very self-serving to mostly Stark. Sure he was trying to recover from the difficulties of ‘New York’ but I feel like he is a little stronger than that as a character. I feel like this was a character piece made for the sole purpose of making Tony Stark seem like a person, but he already was one. He made mistakes in every film and seemed somewhat believable as a person putting their life back together during the Avengers. He eventually makes the sacrifice to put his life on the line and it now it becomes something that gives him panic attacks. From a guy that once dodged a tank shell, was shot at with missiles, killed his lifelong mentor, killed dozens of other ironman drones on top of an evil villain bent on showing the world Iron Man could be injured, fought off an alien invasion, and has been almost killed by his own blood, it seems like a stretch to say that he is now worried about this one other brush with death.

I don’t mean to marginalize his achievements as a character, but Iron Man 3 was not my favorite movie. It was better than the second film, but it still lacked a decent villain (let’s be honest, it was basically just Guy Pierce we hated as we always do), it lacked believability, and it focused on a guy rebuilding his life for the fourth movie in a row.  

How to Train Your Dragon (2010) I Want A Dragon

How To Train Your Dragon (2010) Dreamworks

As soon as this movie became a box office hit, they green-lighted two other sequels practically the same day. I can’t say I blame them because the main character was basically an animal we can all appreciate, a half dog, part cat with the demeanor of a friendly beast for being a dragon. They actually used all sorts of animal noises like elephants, elephant seals, tigers, horses, and domesticated cats to create the sounds Toothless made. The side character was a small kid with the annoying voice of Jay Baruchel who is famous for being a loser in film, but it was fitting nonetheless.

Hiccup was the modern day tale of a kid with daddy issues. He wanted to live up to his father’s expectations and continually fell flat on his face. His dad was relatable because he seems like the everyman who has trouble expressing his feelings to his son. He was a big strong Viking and it was just not in his nature to be emotional or understand the reasoning behind why Hiccup did what he did. He had other stuff to worry about, like feeding the village.

Whenever they talked about Hiccup they told him that he should stop being himself because it wasn’t helping him become a productive member of society. Whenever he was around disaster happened and it was difficult for his father to lead the people with such a misfit son.

When Hiccup meets the dragon, he is put in an interesting conundrum. Slay the dragon and become famous? Or not kill the dragon and eventually find out more about them? If I were Hiccup I probably would’ve killed the dragon and the plot would have ended similarly. Since no one had ever caught a nightfury, it’s safe to assume he would be a big celebrity and that his invention would be used to fend off more dragon attacks. They would eventually force more and more of the dragons away and their village would be safe.

Instead he doesn’t kill the spotted catdog dragon because he sees that it is just another animal and that he was scared of people. Hiccup was being himself and it leads to him finding out all sorts of secrets about dragons. In reality Hiccup just needed to be more of himself and he was going to change everything.

I don’t have a problem with non-conformity to societal and social norms, but I can’t help but feel like Hiccup would’ve had a great run as an inventor. All he really needed was for people to believe in his inventions to prove that they worked and they did work.

The sad part of the movie was the ending when Hiccup loses his left leg, which is a parallel to Toothless losing his left tail fin. It was actually emotional to see Hiccup have to come to grips with losing a limb, which can be a difficult for anyone in the same situation. It was nice to see that Toothless was there to support him the whole time and it reminded me of my awesome dog that would probably do the same. I enjoyed the film and am ready for the other two sequels. A trailer just came out for the second film and it looks good. 

42 (2013) The Shortened Hollywood Version of Jackie's Life (incl several others)

42 (2013) Warner Bros

One of the great disparities of this film are the themes which seem to be conflicting all the time. The story is about Jackie Robinson, but at some points it seems like it's about the reporter telling the story and there are many side plots that have nothing to do with the plot. It is somewhat distracting because you feel like the story is not very fluid. The GM of the dodgers is supposedly doing this because of his convictions about segregation, but tells his employees that it's for the money. If the information was meant to be held back in an effort to make it more dramatic, then it fell flat. All of these things are pertinent but disparities none the less.

The dodgers really did a great thing in choosing Jackie as the person that was going to break the color barrier because he was willing to take one to the face every time he stepped to the plate. It was a burden that no man should've had to bear, but he did it all the same.

I have been a huge baseball fan ever since I was a kid and it is Americans national past time. Every time I go to spring training I think about the fact that there are two locations where baseball is played. Phoenix and Daytona beach. A fact most people forget is that it used to be in Jacksonville and it was moved to accommodate Jackie due to the racial tensions in Jacksonville.

Being white, it's easy for me to feel uncomfortable during these films due to ‘white guilt’. The movie does a good job of making you feel like you’re in a shower and that the dirty water is pooling at your feet due to a clog. I don't feel personally responsible for the actions of others, especially when it comes to slavery. My ancestors went through the Holocaust, genocide, and discrimination in America, but I still feel horrible for their plight. I don't think it is easy for anyone especially if you are ethnic, African American, or Russian Jewish in my case. The great thing about America is that it shows us that many races can live together in harmony and that everyone has something to add to society here.

42 does a great job and explaining the racial tensions of the day and the upbringing most of the player and people were used to. There is a scene with a boy that starts yelling racial obscenities along with his father and seems conflicted about it. It is supposed to point out that racial hatred is learned and not inherent to a child.

One of the odd things about the film is that it switches around from character to character in order to involve a great many people in the story of Jackie Robinson. This is very different than what most films do when trying to highlight the life of a famous person. Those films are usually solely focused on the feelings of the one person according to the things around them. I don’t think it’s a bad thing, but sometimes you get the feeling that they are going for a really dramatic happy ending where everything works out for everyone, but you don’t see all of the characters enough to understand their feelings and difficulties. If we weren't on the road to see it then it’s hard to understand how difficult it is. I feel like we could’ve had a movie for Jackie's wife, Branch Rickey, Leo Durocher, Pee Wee Reese, Ed Charles, Wendell Smith, and Ben Chapman.

By the way I thought Alan Tudyk did a great job with his character and was very hate-able for a guy that just starred in two kid’s movie as Duke and King Candy.

Overall 42 was a very well done version of the Jackie story and although the ending was anti-climactic the real story was far different. He was able to end his career in Brooklyn, eventually win an MVP, and win a championship by the end. Although his abilities were on the decline he still managed to hit .256 that season and left on his own terms, which subsequently was the same way he came in.

Wimbledon (2004) The Role of the Man

Wimbledon (2004) Universal

Maybe it’s just because I like sports, but I found Wimbledon to be a witty romantic comedy that highlights difficulties in life and in sports careers. Unlike other English based romantic comedies, this one provides a less than admirable male lead. Paul Bettany is usually not considered to be good looking or even in shape but manages to pull off an aging tennis player quite well. Kirsten Dunst is cute, but I don’t consider her to be a knockout by any measure. I know this is an odd metric for Rom-Coms but come on, most of them have the quirky girl type and if they aren’t quirky, they are sexy, or strong. Dunst is none of those and I kind of dig it.

Something must be said about the cast. They have a great lineup with Jaime Lannister, Captain Vasili Borodin, Mr. Tumnis, and Iron Mans Bodyguard which ignores the main casting completely.

Playing tennis is rough due to the fact that all the best players are ranked at the top and very few times in its history has an outlier ever won a major tournament. If you are not in the top 10 your chances for winning a major tournament are practically zero.

It has to be mentioned that I am usually not a fan of your typical Rom-Com and I was not excited to see this movie when it first came out. I was pleasantly surprised that the film was able to show the inner doubt of an aging tennis player and some of the inner dialogue was very humorous. I thought that his thoughts were probably accurate and his relationship with Dunst genuine. It’s a circumstance that had a large probability and did not seem far fetch unlike other films of the genre. You are rooting for their relationship but it’s obviously going to have problems because of her father and due to the fact that she starts to have feelings for him.

All this mushy stuff aside I think it is off-putting that this film could not be made if the roles were reversed. If Paul was the strong athlete that gained feelings for the girl and decided to focus on his game rather than get involved he would just come off like a jerk. If the woman does it, Paul’s character spends the rest of the day pining over her. It’s not a weak plot point, but it is something to mention. I don’t see why films have to be so gender oriented. Granted this movie avoids the stereotype with women, but it does convert the male lead into a very weak spirited love junkie. I do not construe this as a bad thing, but it’s one thing to be a man and play the character of the girl and it is completely different to be a man and play the role of a man who just happens to be in love. He doesn’t break out in song, but at some points he just seems so wussy that it makes him an unbelievable character. I guess if I were in his role I would just go for the grand romantic gesture and if it didn’t work then I would let it go. If talking to a sports analyst and pouring your heart out (in hopes that she would see) consist of this moment then it kind of fell short for me, but I am a man and I have been known to lack certain empathies. 

Kung Fu Panda (2008) There Is No Such Thing As An Accident

Kung Fu Panda (2008) Dreamworks 

There is usually a lot to catch up on when reviewing a movie that has now turned into a franchise. Dreamworks can be proud of this film because it is different than its predecessors in that the characters are relatable and not that childish. Usually these movies are a little too kid-friendly in that they lose a majority of their audience because the themes are too boring and the humor is dumb. There are very few cartoons that really are able to relate with a wider audience like Kung Fu Panda does. An example of this would be the Avatar the Last Airbender series.

Po is a relatable character in that he is not well liked and he has problems fitting into an elite crowd. No one is really happy about him becoming the Dragon warrior and the furious 5 are disappointed that the chosen fighter was not one of them. They mask their disappointment in making jokes about how Po is overweight and never going to accomplish anything. As a person it is easy to relate to feeling like Po because many times you feel like others may be saying the same things. Po teaches us the valuable lesson of never giving up and being resolute about trying your best. He was hungry to learn and just plain hungry most of the film. It is inspiring for most of us to see a character like Po especially in a kid’s movie because usually the characters are likable but only due to their ignorance. Most characters spend the entire film realizing who they are while Po is widely aware that he is fat and disliked which drives him to become even better.

What a great message for kids. Even if they don’t fit in, they can be self-aware of themselves to the point that they can overcome their problems or make their problem apart of the solution. Po chooses the latter and finds out that his ‘fatness’ can be used to his advantage and that it is the one thing that combats strength. He has no chi points that can block his nervous system because of the fat he has and it tires his opponents because he can take a lot of hits where most fighters cant.

Kung Fu Panda was a great way to show companies that they can make a solid film that isn’t just for kids. The kids like the movie and can understand much of the story and the adults can actually enjoy the themes of the film. I think it provided a great balance in-between the two and it was a lot of fun to watch. I will most likely watch the second one at some point in the near future too.

Hot Fuzz (2007) It May Be THE Funniest Movie of All Time

Hot Fuzz (2007) Universal

After reading the title you may be skeptical, but if you have seen the movie there may have been a few things you missed. To be honest, the first time I saw the film I thought it wasn’t that funny. I thought it was an average cop comedy that would easily be forgotten, but the more I thought about it the better it got.

A friend of mine (known as Graham) happens to know even more about movies then I do, which I have to say is pretty impressive. I feel like I don’t miss a lot, but whenever we talk about movies this guy drops mind bombs on me. To say the least he has better taste in movies. When I first saw this I told him that I didn’t think it was great and he told me to watch it again this time, but gave me the key to the movie. He said “Watch it this time, but know that every scene is a different genre.” I thought to myself that there was no way that I missed that, but after the second watch I realized how wrong I truly was.

Every scene is a different genre.

You go from buddy cop movie to murder mystery, from mystery to horror, from horror to slasher, and back to gay cop drama. HOW DID I MISS IT! I realized that throughout the film they talk about what seems like arbitrary things, but ends up being a main plot point. Every time someone talks it is foreshadowing something else. Big cop in a small town F-off to the model village à Last scene ends in the model village where he is seemingly larger. Ever shoot two guns whilst jumping through the air at the same time? à Pub scene.

To say the least the film is brilliantly written and directed. You don’t even realize its genius until the second and third watches. Every time you see the film it gets even better. After I watched it this last time I was on the floor even though I knew what was going to happen. I was ashamed of myself when Graham pointed out the best part because I had unknowingly be unaware of brilliance. I will never doubt Graham ever again.

Although many people may not understand British humor, you can’t help but see the irony is most of the things that happen in the film. The spaghetti western part at the end was the perfect way to end the film. There were so many other movies references that led to him making the decision to go back and arrest the whole village.

I can’t help but try to put this film in perspective when comparing it to other great comedies, but it really is in a league of its own. I challenge you to watch this film more than once and ignore how clever it really is.

Definitely on my list for top 5 comedies of all time. 

Captain Phillips (2013) Good Film, Great Story

Captain Phillips (2013) Scott Rudin

I think most of us remember the tension of the event when we first heard about the real life Captain Phillips story. The situation was dire and the event horrific, but we were all pulling for our soldiers and our country to come out on top. Most of the country was not privy to the details of the event until far after it had passed. Of course the movie was a little dramatized, but the event deserved some recognition and the movie covered it well.

The film itself was somewhat politically charged and the plot was fairly accurate from what I have read from the situation. There were so many things I liked from the movie. First the acting was great and the script was written well. During the majority of the film you are surprised with how well the Captain handles the situation that you forget that it happened in real life. You are astonished by the actions he took and how he was able to save the lives of his crew members. The crew in the beginning was very against him and showed a bit of resentment for his stern behavior. The horn of Africa really is an unsafe place and because of how many journeys they go on they may forget about the dangers.

If you have ever lived in a dangerous area you sometimes forget about the problems that can arise if things go wrong. In my younger years I lived in a ‘ghetto’ area and I remember there were a lot of places to avoid. Most of the drug dealers and gang members would leave me alone because I lived in the area, but sometimes there were problems with the drug deals and weapons would be drawn while I was walking home from school. Most of the time it was pretty safe, but some situations arise that you can’t prepare yourself for. I was never taken hostage, but when the Captain was, I could absolutely relate in certain ways of feeling unsafe in an unsafe situation because having weapons drawn on you can be terrifying.

Tom Hanks did a great job with the role and was able to accurately portray this character in this horrible situation. I feel like as Americans, we aggrandize ourselves in many situations. We like to talk as if we are the greatest nation on the earth because of the people that we have here in America. Some of them are great some of them are not, but when we see an average Joe outsmart terrorists from African nations and sacrifice his life over that of his crewmen you can really feel proud of our country.

As soon as the seals show up I was ready for them to do what they do best. They are merchants of death and every one of those pirates probably deserved death even though it is not my place to judge. I personally am displeased with the progress of many of these underdeveloped counties and it is easy to see why so many people get caught up in piracy or any other similarly awful choice. The film is gripping and you cheer for our boys in uniform for doing their job and keeping Americans safe from future attacks. 

I thought Captain Phillips was a solid film and definitely a movie I would recommend to others. 

Enders Game (2013) BUT IT WASN'T LIKE THE BOOK!

Enders Game (2013) Summit

It’s hard to explain my feelings about this movie because I have waited close to 10 years to see it made correctly. I have waited patiently because I am a fan of the book series and I happen to enjoy great film. For me I love to read books because the capture a wide breadth of story and character development. If you read books you will already feel smarter than most of your friends and colleagues because you get to see viewpoints amassed by those with more experiences. This gives them great depth of character even if they are fictional and it is hard to look at the world in the same way after seeing from the viewpoints of others for so long.

This book series has helped me learn a great deal about myself because often times I find myself thinking like Ender. I weight the options of the greater good and I view humans as if they were an alien species. It helps me to understand a great deal about cultures and why people act as they do. I find Ender very accessible as a character because I emulate a larger strategy plan like he does. I may not have the eidetic memory of a Sheldon Cooper, but some of his quirks are shared with me.

I will say that the movie did not do well with the critics and it certainly failed in the box office numbers. This is depressing to me because again it is a far cry from what critics were writing. This movie had some political implications before it came out because the writer of the book is against gay marriage. I feel like that was a major contributor to the demise of this film. Many boycotted the film and the critics didn’t give it a fair assessment. The people who saw it did enjoy it.

This being said I will take up some of the petty grievances or complaints I have become accustomed of hearing when critics and friends talk about the film.

1.       “It wasn’t as good as the book”

·          Granted. A movie rarely possesses the same complicated themes a book can describe in detail and very few movies have a director that is able to condense the sheer size of a story into a cinematic format (unless they are named Peter Jackson and get unlimited budgets and runtimes).

2.       “It was rushed”

·         Of course it was. It’s hard to name a book adapted movie series that actually wasn’t rushed besides LOTR i.e. Harry Potter, Hunger Game, etc. Movies that are based on characters with mostly inner dialogue always lose the majority of their characters in the movie because you can only see their conflictions and not hear them. This brings me to another grievance.

3.       “Ender doesn’t seem that smart”

·         Agreed to an extent, they failed to convincingly show that Ender was constantly being watched and didn’t want to show his feelings very often. It didn’t show how much he hated Graff even before the Bonzo event. It didn’t show how he brilliantly out-thought Graff on many occasions and many of his actions were meant to make him the leader he wanted to be on his own terms. He was so far beyond his cohorts and he was beloved and hated at the same time, like Julius Ceasar. If they had spent more time in battle school, it would’ve been easier to see how far ahead he really was intellectually. His inner dialogue is very complicated for a similar person of his age. Notice that Katniss seems like a witless moron, but in the book she was much brighter than she appears to be in her film. You can’t adequately explain a character without time and since they had to condense the film, you lost a great deal of his achievements and intelligence.

4.       “Ender was easily manipulated”

·         Wrong. He was manipulated in order to show what he would do in certain situations and in the book he was much younger than he appeared in the film. He accepted many of the manipulations as tests and begrudged Graff for them, but constantly outperformed the expected results. He couldn’t control his life because that wasn’t his concern, but to say that he was easily manipulated in the film just shows that it was is a misconceived understanding.

5.       “The ending was easily foreshadowed”

·         Sure. In the movie it was. I can easily blame the director Gavin Hood for not only leaving out important dialogue, but absolutely failing miserably to continue with the themes of the book. He botched the ending by forcing the film to move at a rate that left regular viewers far behind. For the life of me I cannot understand why he was even allowed to write this. Sure the executive producers could’ve had more creative input, but they obviously couldn’t see past the problems of the script and the feeling of being “rushed” though the movie. I think Card was a part of the process, but never really got the control he wanted. The movie execs probably gave Hood the green light and didn’t want to have any scripts edited during the filming process. The movie itself had passed through the hands of 3 companies that I know of and finally ended up with Summit who failed to provide the story with a real script writer, director, and production company.

That being said I don’t really have an opinion on the critics themselves but their websites could easily be confused with buzzfeed or tabloid journalism at best. Most of the reviewers did not give this film a fair assessment and some of their criticisms while viable are also misplaced. It is easy to say that it was rushed or that it was not comparable to the book, but the honest truth is that this movie was never going to be LOTR or the Hunger Games. It didn’t have the director, the budget, the runtime, the script, or the production company with the stones to do it right. The movie did fall a little flat compared to the book, but I did not think that the message lost much of its potency. The story is captivating and shows us the difficulties of war, the decisions to be made, and the harsh mental conditions it put Ender through. The battle school may have not been moral, but it was necessary. I still thought it was a good film despite what problems I have with it. I didn’t care that it was rushed because it was entertaining and gripping. 

Adam Out.

The Other Guys (2010) The Tuna and the Shark

The Other Guys (2010) Columbia

Cop dramas are a dime a dozen and if you don’t believe me then you should thinking about brushing up on your television. Every other show is about police in one branch of government or another. They are usually over dramatized and filled with bad one-liners. Police movies are also overdone, but the cop buddy comedies have risen in success and hilarity in recent years.

The Other Guys was an instant classic as far as comedies go in this millennium because of its ridiculous dialogue and oddball references.  From the first scene which is basically just a cameo for The Rock and Sam Jackson you know this movie is going to be funny, but not to what extent. I mean they started off by driving a car into a bus and then using that bus to propel them into another building which explodes. They catch the bad guys who apparently only had a half pound of weed and caused 12 million dollars in damage to the city. Not only does no one care about this, but these two cops are beloved by the people in the city and the media for being reckless and charismatic. Of course they die a scene later jumping off a 20 story building to catch some thieves which only adds to their legacy.

I don’t think I have seen a better PG-13 film comedy wise. Sure there was violence, crude references, and some drug references, but most of it was easily forgotten because of how funny Will Ferrell and Mark Whalberg are. It’s interesting to see Ferrell seemingly make more out of every character he plays. In the other films directed by the same guy, Ferrell plays a very different type of character in each one albeit they are similar. In this film he is an explosive yet passive personality. He has some conflicting feelings since he was a pimp in college while openly denying it. I’d have some issues if that was my life too.

Both characters have an identity issue and the movie itself has one as well. The end credits make you feel as if you were watching some corporate espionage story when in fact it was a comedy that features a wooden gun, a guy who accidentally shot Derek Jeter, and a police captain that makes several TLC references. I feel like it was supposed to be a part of some bigger theme, but it gets derailed so many times for so many reasons. When it ends you are supposed to just remember that the cops did their job while everything goes back to normal. I felt like that was kind of disappointing.

The Other Guys was a good idea and it was a funny movie. I wish they made more films like this, but it didn’t do so well in the box office so I doubt they will. Years later the movie is still funny. 

Dhoom 2 (2006) Machale!

Dhoom 2 (2006)  Yash Raj Films

Before Dhoom 2 I had never seen a “Bollywood” film. Bollywood is India’s version of Hollywood and they make some interesting films. One thing I love about Indian films is that they are known for being quirky, ridiculous, and having amazing dance choreography. The music videos are real. Every time I go to a hip Indian restaurant I can usually listen for some Bollywood hits I remember from all sorts of films. They are very catchy tunes that are easily remembered. I even sing them to myself unknowingly sometimes.

Dhoom 2 was the first film Bollywood film I saw and it is still by far the best. I don’t really feel like this film is supposed to be serious. Every time I see it, I am reminded of how ridiculous it is and then I wonder if it is meant to be a satire of American films. I say that because American films are ridiculous. Our action films show a lack of thought, possibilities, and most importantly physics. They make no sense and Dhoom 2 is no different. The stunts are stupidly funny on top of ridiculous that they were made to be that way. There are countless shots of people jumping off cliffs and other stuff. It’s so good that something must be said about the slow motion cinematography. First of all the slow motion stuff is next level. From the basketball scene to the jumping off cliffs, it’s absolutely gorgeous to watch. Secondly anything with Aishwarya Rai and Bipasha Basu is a great lesson in dancing and beauty. They may be two of the most beautiful women on the planet.

The 2 male leads are also dangerous and mysterious characters the way only celluloid can provide. Both of them are believable in their characters and are determined to outmaneuver the other. Bachchan is the dectective that has his own way of doing things even if it is outside the law. Hrithik is the mysterious criminal mastermind that never misses his target. They collide in this film and eventually… become friends? Yes that’s right, in Indian cinema the two settle their differences and allow one another to live free of their past. That would never happen in Hollywood. They must hate each other and value the others demise more than their own life. I was not expecting to see an officer of the law be so accommodating to the villains. After Rai’s character kills Hrithik, Bachchan just lets her go and lets her life be her punishment. I have also never witnessed a film where someone was absolved of murder so that they could live their life of shame. That’s kind of awesome. I wish people had more of a moral compass to the point that if you committed crime, but the only punishment was having the fortitude to press forward knowing what you have done. Heavy stuff from a mostly comical and action packed film.

The whole point of the movie is to prove that love is sacrifice and the film proves it on many occasions including a scene featuring Russian roulette. The scene isn’t great because it is over-dramatized, but the message is great. This film also features the first kiss on screen in Bollywood history. Although the women are dressed in somewhat more revealing clothing, they are very wholesome throughout the film. No raunchy sex scenes, just weird dance scenes that allows each character to prove their love… through song. I happen to appreciate that fact and it is highly refreshing. I am already excited for Dhoom 3, but I am unable to get a copy in America. 

Escape Plan (2013) At Least It's Better Than The Expendables

Escape Plan (2013) Summit

When I first saw the trailer, I thought about who was actually going to go see a Sylvester Stallone film. Every time one of these movies come out, you expect the worse and Stallone does not disappoint ever. He has not put out a good film since Cliffhanger, so I expected more of the same and I got more of the same, but I didn’t expect some of it.

During the beginning of the film you are expecting him to have a character that is better than everyone else in whatever he does. He will have inexplicable amounts of knowledge that make him the best protagonist ever conceived and a guy you don’t want to mess around with. Of course he gets into a job that is over his head and then has to MacGyver a way out of it. The situation is dire and the difficulty level is not difficult, but impossible because its Mission Impossible: Agent Stallone!!! Whoops wrong franchise. The dialogue in the film is horrendous but it could’ve been the Expendables. The worst part of the movie is the early relationship of Stallone and Arnold which is a constant measuring contest of who the tougher guy is. I can’t stand this garbage, they are both old and both of their characters made no sense as the tough guy due to their backgrounds (Stallone was a Lawyer and Arnold was a computer programmer?).

The thing that was weird about this movie is that I didn’t completely hate it as I was planning to. Some of it was actually good. I have to admit that I thought Jim Caviezel did a fantastic job in this film and nearly revived it from the oblivion of a film that will be found soon in the $5 dollar bin at your local Wal-Mart. For the most part the film is incredibly unbelievable as you expect, but the plot is not all that bad even though the prison is located in the most unconceivable location with the most ridiculous security ever conceived. It is so unnecessary that it begs the question of which people on the planet are bad enough to get sent to this place? Undoubtedly Stallone is left alone by the other inmates who get beat up by him as easily as a 16 yr old in skinny jeans, but in all fairness most of them seem like decent people running very friendly opium cartels and bringing down corrupt banks. I couldn’t believe that all these undesirables ended up being such friendly people.

I won’t ruin the plot by telling you what happens in the story, but I will mention that the ending is both bogus and not as bad as you expect. There is a TWIST… that is explained in one sentence and it honestly didn’t surprise me in any way. I was impressed because this movie followed its usual formula, but actually had the semblance of a plot. Sure it wasn’t the greatest film made in the last few months, but it was entertaining and I repeat, not as bad as expected. I think I may even watch this film again. 

The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) The Beginning of the Manliest Story Ever Told

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) New Line Cinema

Years after first watching the epic tale of the Lord of the Rings there are still things I have missed in the previous 25 times before this one. This is by far the best movie series on the planet and I could argue that if you combine the three of them that it is one of the greatest stories ever told. Every part of the movie has fantastic qualities from the cinematography to the characters and their dialogue. From top to bottom you couldn’t have picked a finer cast and it is a great representation of what a film should be. 

Every time I see the council when they decide on the ring bearer my heart drops for Frodo because he almost doesn't know what he is in for. After seeing the whole trilogy you wish you could tell him what was coming. Of course there was no one else that would've been able to do the task, but that isn't important.

As a man I can easily relate to the characters in this film. Not all men, but some are honorable. These types of people are the standard to which all good men wish to judge themselves. Whether it be in the line of duty or the storied tales of tough men throughout history. Great men always seek to become greater than themselves. Aragorn is not a perfect man and neither are Boromir and Gimli, but they are men of character. They did not need to swear an oath of allegiance to Frodo or Gandalf or the Ring. They followed him because Frodo needed the help and more importantly it was the right thing to do for humanity. They didn't weigh the options. They accepted it as their fates to represent their kingdoms and peoples in under a few seconds. They knew what was ahead of them because Boromir just explained that Mordor was the most foul place that ever existed and that it would take more than 10,000 men. That is real sacrifice (in a fictional tale). The characters aren't these buff unrealistic looking action heroes that live for some perfect death they hope to create for themselves. They are regular people making a difference with the skills they have. None of them are all that big they aren't even the best fighters in Middle Earth. They just did the best they could with what they were given. They are quality characters and it is sad to see male protagonists in film now because they lack these types of characteristics. Half of the men in Hollywood can’t even act similarly because they lack the fortitude and strength of persona.

The action scenes are not even that farfetched (with the exception of Boromir's death). Aragorn fights the Orc commander in under a minute. They are both bleeding and the killing blow was simple. No ridiculous backflips or gaining extra strength the more they are punched in the face. Some of their abilities are a little over exaggerated, but that is to be expected in fantasy.

At the end you are still excited for the next movie in the series because you know it gets even better. Sure the hardships are hard to bear, but by small means were they able to tear down evil for good.

 It’s hard not to feel passionately about this film for the range of emotions a person can feel throughout the films. You love and hate a lot of the characters and are glad they were able to grow so much as people through very tough situations. 

Last Vegas (2013) Who Knew?

Last Vegas (2013) CBS

At first thought, you may wonder what this movie is actually about. I thought it was going to be the last hurrah for a few older gents that wanted to relive their glory days of chasing tail and giving each other a hard time. They do make fun of each other a lot, but it is never maliciously done. I honestly was not expecting a drama about guys who have been friends for over 60 years.

Each character comes from a different circumstance of elderly life. Morgan Freeman comes from a situation where he is being babied by his family because they are worried about his health. De Niro is an old curmudgeon that lost his wife and his will to enjoy life. Michael Douglas is a rich man who never found real love. Kevin Kline was still with his wife, but felt trapped by his life with her.

Each character embodies a different style of a person in the later years of their life and the film has very little to do with trying to get women half their age in Vegas. During the film you can see how each character has lived over the years and De Niro is probably the most honest of the four about his life and the way the others live theirs. He criticizes them for running away from their lives and not being able to confront their problems although he hasn’t as well.

Although there are so gratuitous moments of the film, there is no nudity. Being a Las Vegas native I can testify to the authenticity of some of the situations they are caught up in like being the judges of a bikini contest. Stuff like that and meeting transsexuals is not out of the question.

The characters have some problems that haven’t been resolved since they were kids and they are understandable secrets to keep. Too many years have gone by since they happened and it would be difficult to talk about them now.

Last Vegas was much more diverse than I expected it to be and I ended up enjoying it to a point. I am not saying it’s a great film, but if you are interested in what I have already written then you might have a fun time watching it.

I was happy to see Jerry Ferrara back in a film because he was a great character in Entourage. The last time I saw him was in the movie Battleship (2012) which like this film was much better than it looked. I am hoping he has a good performance in Lone Survivor (2013) so that I can officially say he is back.

Last Vegas was fun, heartfelt, and provided interesting point of view. Maybe my expectations were supremely lowered due to the marketing of the film, but I thought it wasn’t a waste of time like I expected. I may never watch it again, but for a one time watch it was good. 

Brave (2012) Merida is the Best “Disney” Princess

Brave (2012) Pixar

It’s not often you get to see a real mother daughter relationship on film. In fact, even in television shows the parents resolve most of their issues with their children in less than 22 minutes and always have some special way of connecting with them so that they understand why. Real life is not like that. Most parents fight with their children about the same issues over long periods of time. Both sides hardly ever come to a conclusion without some shouting match or concessions given by both sides.

I felt like Brave was able to display these relationships accurately and asks children a very difficult question for a younger age group. Is what you want for yourself to become someone very different than your mother?

If you have a mother than you know that this is a difficult question to answer. The two of them do not understand the opinions of the other and do not come to an understanding until they are put in a situation where they need to survive. They are both stubborn and if you come from a Scottish family like me than this is no real surprise.

One of my favorite things about Merida is that she is not your typical princess. Not only is she uninterested in a prince to come save her, but it adamantly opposed to the idea of a man she doesn’t love. It’s like a Bollywood film gone Pixar in Scotland.  I don’t mind that she resembles her father both in attitude and looks because I have met a lot of girls that are like their fathers and they are easily relatable. How can you disagree with a girl that wants to change one of her family members? I think we have all wanted to do that on several occasions. My father always tells me that I need to have good relationships with my family because they are the only people in your life that you can’t get rid of haha.

Merida really is the best “Disney” princess. She’s down to earth, free spirited, independent, rebellious, intelligent, soft of heart, and she flaunts no particular features to make women self-conscious about their looks (as animation is so good at doing for both women and men). She is highly gifted for horse riding, sword fighting, and most of all bow shooting. These are important skills to have because there are always dangers in the land and even those who can’t protect themselves can still fall to the sword.

I am excited for the next Brave movie and hope that Pixar eventually explains “The Pixar Theory” which has grown to be an internet phenomenon. Every Pixar film is practically film gold because they are able to adapt stories that resonate with all age groups. They have a lot more to accomplish in the years to come and it’s worth the wait. 

True Grit (2010) Pretty Well Figured

True Grit (2010) Paramount

A few days ago, I realized that I had not seen a western this month which is a fact I cannot live with. Whether it be a remake or the original a western is a western. I consider it a shame not to at least view a western a few times a year because it gives us a good perspective on how simple life used to be here in America. Before the big cities and the modern conveniences, Americans used to have true grit. It is hard to actually come across a person these days that has put their shoulder to the plow and not on some dude ranch vacation.  When you watch a western you gain a thankful heart that you do not have to spend your days worrying about how to feed your family or if they will die from some disease.

True Grit is the story of an old marshal that has out grown his time and a young girl who seeks justice fort the violent murder of her father. In those days there wasn’t much justice to be had without paying top dollar, so the young girl Maddie aims to find a real tough guy to hunt down the murderer and bring him some.

Whenever you watch these types of westerns you always think about how difficult it must be to find people out in the wilderness. If you are anything like me, I can get lost just hunting small game on foot. On horse, it would be somewhat easier to get around, but people could be making camp anywhere around you so it is not like walking to the front door of a house. Even lawmen through the fifties had a difficult time actually pinning criminals to the murders. The evidence was not much and witnesses were easily disposed of.

True Grit is a better remake than it is an original with John Wayne. Although “The Duke” is an American icon, this was towards the end of his career and not his best work. Jeff Bridges brings out an even better side of ‘Rooster’ and plays a great drunk. I will say that even Matt Damon has a good role in this film and surprisingly did much better than I expected even for a Texas Ranger. Bridges is an honest character and you could say that he was easily frustrated with the general public of the day. I would also consider this movie to be a comedy if you consider one-liners and arguments to be an art form. Rooster and LaBoeuf go back and forth with each other and it makes for a good time.

Although this film may have its quirks, it is an awesome tale about the man Rooster Cogburn and his last hurrah as a marshal and the gumption of a quick witted young woman. He is a drunk but he is loyal to the end. The ending was worth the watch and you are cheering for the hero Rooster and glad he is such an authentic American cowboy that speaks with authentic frontier gibberish accent.

For a movie with an estimated budget of 38 million and a worldwide gross of 245 million, you can bet it was as worth seeing it then and it still is now.   

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013) It Caught Our Attention Again

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013)  Lionsgate

Chances are that if you are reading this post, you are already a fan of the book or of the movie series. I have to admit that these movies are done incredibly well and are able to give the books their due justice. I am also a fan (I even named my car Katniss) and have loved the movies so far.

If you read my site (and I am hoping you do) you already know that I am a fan of JLaw and think she’s a great actress. She is fun and down to earth and everything you would hope a celebrity to be.

Catching Fire was my favorite book of the series and I say that because it is the last one that takes place in the arena and it had an ending I wasn’t expecting. I guess I was always hoping/expecting that Katniss would eventually stop being so selfish and do the right thing and try loving Peeta at least to keep up pretenses for the capital in the hopes that war wouldn’t be necessary. Sadly she is so hostile and untrustworthy that Haymitch is forced to continually lie to her in all situations. She fails to do the small task that President Snow gives her and causes the deaths of many people. You can’t blame Haymitch for his actions because who wouldn’t do the same thing? In order to protect her (even from herself) he is forced to leave her out of the big picture which causes unexpected consequences.

During the film you can tell that something is going on behind the scenes because everyone else is privy to knowledge that Katniss doesn’t know about. When I was emotionally involved in the story I always wished that Peeta would tell her something so that she knew that they would somehow live though this, but it would’ve been impossible. At times it is hard for me to watch the film because of the way the characters treat Katniss. I always felt she was much stronger than she was portrayed as, but I was willing to accept this as a movie flaw for exponential character growth through all the films.

One thing I disliked about the film is that Liam Hemsworth is in it. His gloomy faces and poor emotional deliveries make me want to punch him in the face as often as possible. I know he is loved by women for his looks, but he needs to go. Find a real man to play Gale. Seriously almost anyone else will do.

I liked that they spend a large part of the movie before the games to show the relationship between Peeta and Katniss as well as keeping the Gale triangle alive. I thought it would be hard to juggle all of them, but they did a good job making sure both characters are still relevant. I thought that they could’ve explained the feelings that Katniss had better because the book derives the majority of her personality from her thoughts. The only thing the two movies left out was the inner dialogue of Katniss and although it takes away from the general story of the movie, it is relevant and pertinent to the story as a whole.

For some minimal concerns I have, it is a well done movie and pays homage the book series in many ways. I thought that Catching Fire was the better of the two and I am already excited to see the third.