Review: Kick-Ass 2

The original Kick-Ass was a fun, sharp, self-aware play on the superhero genre punctuated by humor, sarcasm, and over-the-top violence.  While the movie was not necessarily everyone’s cup of tea, it was an anthem of sorts to anyone who has ever read a comic book, watched a Saturday morning cartoon, or plunked down cash at the cinema to witness caped vigilantes save the day.  Ultimately, because of its cult following (and of course its success in the home entertainment market), Universal decided to move forward with a sequel.  The result of this decision is a movie that hardly resembles (in look and feel) its predecessor, despite the fact that nearly every surviving character from the first movie reprises their respective role.

The plot of Kick-Ass 2 finds Kick-Ass ad Hit Girl moving forward with their leaves after the events of the first film and each is coping with the fallout in different ways.  With the increasing emergence of citizens taking up the role of costumed vigilantes, Aaron Taylor-Johnson’s Dave feels compelled to once again put on his Kick-Ass costume and join a league dedicated to preserving justice, while Chlore Grace Moretz’s Mindy is convinced by her stepfather to leave behind that life.  Still thirsting for revenge, Christopher Mintz-Plasse's Chris D'Amico assembles a squad of super villains to hunt down and destroy Kick-Ass and his cohorts, thus setting up the ultimate faceoff between the two.

The first and foremost reason why this film fails is that unlike its predecessor, this film is not so much a self-aware tongue-in-cheek look at the superhero genre, but more a straight forward narrative.  Perhaps there is nothing left in the genre to be prodded or perhaps writer/director Jeff Wadlow’s script just isn’t as insightful, but the fact of the matter is that Kick-Ass would not have worked as a nuts-and-bolts credible narrative and neither does this one.  The plot is just too farcical and nonsensical to be played straight and needless to say that the absence of Matthew Vaughn behind the camera is glaring.

Another problem with Kick-Ass 2 is that it feels as though the film loses its way very early on in the plot.  Another strength of its predecessor is that even though it was set in New York City, there was a small intimate feeling to the story.  Everything felt very contained in a specific time and space and that kept the narrative taut and the pacing brisk.  With the expanded scope and scale of Kick-Ass 2, that sort of vibe and pacing that marked the first film gets lost and likewise, the plot holes and logic leaps feel that much bigger and much more egregious.

My last issue with this film has to do with the work of Aaron Taylor-Johnson.  Taylor-Johnson has turned in some good work in the past (Kick-Ass, Anna Karenina), but it doesn’t take too much screen time to realize he has outgrown this role.  The hair, the posture, his voice – it all seems so forced not unlike those last few years of Jaleel White as Urkel on Family Matter.  In fact, that is a perfect analogy.  It makes you feel like there is no credibility to his portrayal of the awkward teen protagonist and that breaks the “reality” of the film.

As for his precocious co-star, Chloe Grace Moretz, she continues to act beyond her years.  Unfortunately, the role is not up to snuff.  Her character’s assimilation into real-life seems so oddly detached from the film, playing out like scenes from Mean Girls 2 that were left on the cutting room floor.  It’s a story no one wants to see that does more harm to the pacing of the film than any good it might do for character development.  Since 500 Days of Summer, it’s been evident that Moretz can act, but with this and her upcoming turn in the Carrie remake, the question remains as to whether she (and her people) are choosing proper roles.

As for the rest of the cast, no one stands out from the collection of pedestrian performances.  Christopher Mintz-Plasse as super villain Chris D’Amico plays an iteration of pretty much every other character that he has ever played; ditto for Clark Duke and Donald Faison as Kick-Ass’ friend Marty and the likable but unremarkable Dr. Gravity respectively.  As for the more seasoned of the principle players, Morris Chestnut, John Leguizamo, and Jim Carrey do little more than go through the paces in limited screen time – presumably laughing all the way to the bank.  Ultimately, their performances fall in line with what looks and feels like a mediocre production from start to finish.

When you consider the film from top to bottom it’s impossible not to conclude that Kick-Ass 2 is a sequel that didn’t need to be made.  It’s slower and more violent than the first, but more importantly, not nearly as clever.  Only a small portion of the general public will mine some entertainment value from watching this film, so it is really difficult for me to recommend it.  At best, it’s a rental for fans of the action and/or superhero genre but even then it is not a slam dunk to entertain.  As for those of you who truly loved the first Kick-Ass, The Matrix rules should apply; meaning if you want to preserve your affinity for the first film, then avoid this sequel. 

Standout Performance:  Lindy Booth, since I have noting bad to say.

Read More

Review: Movie 43

The year was 1991.  I had hopped on the train to Boston to enjoy a saturday with friends.  After a fine meal, we decided to see a movie at the Loews Copley Plaza (gone but not forgotten).  Someone insisted on seeing a movie I had never heard of called Drop Dead Fred and we all acquiesced.  I was basking in the glow of a perfect day away from school and thought nothing could ruin the moment.  Twenty minutes into the movie, I realized that I was horribly wrong.  There was one thing that could do just that…and I was now watching it.  As I walked out of the cinema some ninety minutes later I uttered these three words: “worst movie ever.”  In the two decades since, I may have echoed that sentiment a few times, but no movie has truly been able to seize that moniker from Drop Dead Fred.  All of that changed yesterday when I watched Movie 43, because it is indeed the “worst movie ever.”

Movie 43 is a collection of self-contained sketches directed by a collection of individuals featuring casts that are accomplished to varying degrees.  The comedic (and I use that word lightly) skits are tied together by a plotline featuring Dennis Quaid as a deranged screenwriter who desperately and forcibly pitches script ideas to a film executive (Greg Kinnear).  What ensues is a litany of asinine juvenile sketches that wouldn’t even be good enough for the SNL cutting room floor. 

Let’s cut to the chase.  Yes, it really is the worst movie I have ever seen and were it not for extreme boredom I probably would not have made it past the first twenty minutes.  However, what is most surprising about this movie is some of the names attached to it.  Some of that can be explained away by the fact that each actor’s awareness of the production was contained to their own respective sketches.  While that nugget absolves absolutely no one, it makes things a bit more palatable.   Peter Farrelly (There's Something About Mary, Kingpin) however has no such excuse as he championed this project from start to finish as a writer/producer/director.

So what makes it so bad?  The skit about an eligible bachelor with testicles on his neck (Hugh Jackman) would in most cases mark the low point for any film, but not in this one.  With sketches about coprophilia (Anna Faris), female menstruation (Chloe Grace Moretz), and rowdy birthday leprechauns, the film manages to reach new lows every time you think it could not possibly get any worse.  The experience of watching Movie 43 is best likened to following the real life exploits of Lindsay Lohan on TMZ.  It’s repulsive and disgusting yet demands attention because you just can’t help but wonder how far the once mighty can fall.  Rest assured, this film will plummet beneath whatever depths of idiocy you can fathom.

If I absolutely had to pick out a bright spot or two in the movie, I would single out real life couple Liev Schreiber and Naomi Watts for their portrayal of a married couple who has opted to home school their son.  Likewise, Terrence Howard as the coach of an all black high basketball team stands slightly above the other sketches.  Sure, those two skits have moments where they pander to the lowest denominator in society, but there are also some genuinely funny punch lines that almost make you forget the shame and regret that mounts the longer you watch this movie.

To spend any more time discussing Movie 43 would be a disservice to myself and to the rest of humanity.  Before you clicked on this post, you were probably not inclined to watch this movie and hopefully, nothing I have written will in any way change your opinion.  There’s bad; then there’s terrible; and then there’s another level that you should completely avoid and this is one of those movies you should never watch…ever…under any circumstances.  In fact, should this DVD ever find its way into your life, you should treat it as you would the VHS tape from The Ring.  Break it; burn it; throw it in a well; whatever you need to do to make sure your eyes never see a single frame.  You’ve been warned.

Standout Performance: Everyone who passed on this movie.  

Read More

Review: Dark Shadows (2012)

Love or hate him, the one thing you can say about Johnny Depp is that he makes interesting choices.  The lineup of characters that he has played is a veritable rogues gallery of the eccentric.  Sure, there is the occasional John Dillinger (Public Enemies) or George Jung (Blow), but more often than not Depp has been covered in wigs, makeup, and outlandish costumes – especially when Tim Burton is involved.  There have been some signature performances along the way, but there have also been some incredible misses.  Before ever seeing a single frame of Dark Shadows, I was prepared to label it the latter.  Now having seen the movie, I am not exactly sure under which category this performance belongs, but this is oddly appropriate since few have been able to properly grasp the scope of the movie itself.

Dark Shadows (2012) - based on a fantasy horror TV show from the late 1960’s – is the story of Barnabas Collins, a cursed vampire who returns from a 200 year absence to find his family’s fortunes in decay.  While vowing to return the Collins family to prominence, he must also deal with the haunting loss of his former love, with his unquenchable thirst for blood, and with the witch who has cursed his family.

If you can believe it, this movie was originally marketed as a comedy.  This means that either the film was wrongly marketed or poorly executed.  Sure there are a few chuckles that come from the fish-out-of-water set up of having a vampire wake up two centuries later smack dab in the middle of 1970’s Maine, but that novelty fades quickly along with any sense of humor.  What’s left is a jambalaya comprised of soap opera caliber familial melodrama, cheesy Goth, and 1970’s décor – not necessarily the most appetizing cinematic combination.  I did not however hate this movie like I thought I would, but I was left wondering why anyone would make this movie and why anyone would go out of their way to see it.  While it’s not terribly executed, there’s no purpose or appeal to this project – hence the relatively modest $238M worldwide gross (or roughly a $35M loss for WB).

In the film, Tim Burton’s direction is surprisingly subdued by his usual outlandish standards and I actually like the way he and his creative team capture Maine.  This goes ditto for the cast.  Johnny Depp knows how to play weird and eccentric and Michelle Pfeiffer, Helena Bonham Carter, and Jackie Earle Haley absolutely exude the decay that has taken hold of the Collins estate.  Likewise, Bella Heathcote does a nice job as the pretty but detached Victoria Winters.  Sadly, disappointment with the cast came from two very unlikely sources in Eva Green and Chloe Grace Moretz.  Both have shown themselves extremely well in the past in Casino Royale and (500) Days of Summer respectively, but their performances in this film seemed off kilter and a little too camp for my taste.

So then what this adds up to is a decently directed and decently acted movie with a clunky premise and an awkward plot, which just kind of makes all the effort seem for naught.  While Dark Shadows is not really a terrible movie, I can’t find any one good reason to recommend that you see it.  This is a bottom-of-the-Netflix-queue kind of movie that you will probably never get around to seeing because the continuous stream of new releases hitting the market.  However, should you find yourself sitting in front of the television on a Wednesday night with the movie onscreen, you won’t completely loath yourself for watching it.  For all you Johnny Depp fans, here is hoping he finds better luck in his next feature film as Tonto in The Lone Ranger.  I, for one, am not optimistic.

Standout Performance: Bella Heathcote.  It is a fine line to playing a slightly detached   character from as such a performance can easily be construed as cold and robotic.  Heathcote pulls it off well and maintains a strong semblance of likability.

Read More

Review: Hugo

If you take Academy Award nominations as an absolute barometer of whether a movie is good or not (which I do not), then clearly without seeing the movie Hugo, you would have to believe that there is something of merit in it – especially since it garnered 11 nominations.  I don’t know why I passed this film over during this past Oscar season, but I think that the marketing drove that decision.  To me it skewed young and had an almost animated feel to it.  Now having watched the movie on the heels of a series of terrible rentals, I can’t believe I waited so long to see it and have been reminded how refreshing it is to watch a cinematic master direct a film.

The plot of the Hugo follows the life of an orphan who lives in a Paris train station set in the 1930’s.  As Hugo works to completely restore an automaton, his life is forever altered by a set of individuals whose own lives revolve around the comings and goings at that station.

What’s best about the movie is the story and how well it is told through the vision and direction of Martin Scorsese.  The look and feel of the film is stunning and the city framed and brought to life with an artistic flair.  As the movie unfolds, one cannot help but be wrapped up in the motion and the sound that punctuate the action.  It takes very little effort to become engaged and for your attention to be held.  This was most surprising for me as I went into the film questioning whether I would be entertained.

The cast of course is top notch.  Names such as Ben Kingsley, Emily Mortimer, and Christopher Lee have a certain cache in acting circles and each lives up to their respective reputations.  Kingsley especially stands out of this foursome as he expertly delivers each line and punctuates it with just the right brand of emotion.  Jude Law – in limited screen time – is surprisingly good in this film as is Sacha Baron Cohen in a rare dramatic turn.  As for our protagonist Hugo, Asa Butterfield is good in the lead role but at times his relative inexperience shows.  However the experience of the cast surrounding him manages to cover up those minor flaws. 

Scorsese uses this cast, the sets, and the visual detail to create a perpetual sense of motion to the film – the motion of time, of intertwining mechanical pieces, of individuals traveling from place to place, and born from this orchestrated chaos he delivers a sub plot revolving around the concept of capturing motion pictures on film and its newfound place as a form of timeless art.  This part of the story is most elegantly told by Scorsese through Kingsley’s acting and as one who loves movies, I found this arc to be the most compelling in the film.

As you may have guessed by now, I believe this is a movie worth seeing.  It will not take but five minutes to realize that you are watching an expertly crafted product that is warrants both the time and effort it will take to rent/buy and watch it.  The one drawback to the film is that as fantastic a story as it is, I don’t feel overly compelled to watch it a second time.  However, one of the strength’s of the movie is that it is a smooth straight-line narrative sans any plot twists or gimmicks and this type of film lends itself to one good viewing.  Regardless, I recommend you watch it - with a loved one, a friend, or member of the family.  It matters not as it is suitable for all.  As for those who are fans of Ben Kingsley fans, be sure to keep an eye out for him starring opposite Robert Downey Jr. next year in the much-anticipated Marvel film, Iron Man 3.

Standout Performance: Chloe Grace Moretz gets the nod here not only for Hugo but also for her work in Kick-Ass, Diary of a Wimpy Kid, and (500) Days of Summer.  At the age of 15, she has already turned in a number of stellar performances.

Read More