Monday, August 15, 2011

Top Ten Best Comic-Book Films.

The List:
1. The Dark Knight - 9 /10
2. Batman Begins - 8 /10
3. Iron Man - 8 /10
4. The Iron Giant - 8 /10
5. Unbreakable - 8 /10
6. Superman - 7.5 /10
7. Captain America - 7.5 /10
8. The Incredible Hulk - 7.5 /10
9. X-Men: First Class - 7.5 /10
10. Batman - 7.5 /10



To see where I rank the rest...

The Batman series:
-Batman (1989) -- 7/10
-Batman Returns (1992) -- 5/10
-Batman Forever (1995) -- 3.5/10
-Batman & Robin (1997) -- 3/10
-Batman Begins (2005) -- 8/10
-The Dark Knight (2008) -- 9/10

The Superman series:
-Superman (1978) -- 7.5/10
-Superman II (1980) -- 7/10
-Superman III (1983) -- 3/10
-Superman IV (1987) -- 4/10
-Superman Returns (2006) -- 6/10

Marvel series:
-Blade (1998) -- 6/10
-X-Men (2000) -- 7/10
-Blade II (2002) -- 5.5/10
-Spider-Man (2002) -- 7/10
-Daredevil (2003) -- 5/10
-X-Men 2 (2003) --7/10
-Hulk (2003) -- 6/10
-The Punisher (2004) -- 6/10
-Spider-Man 2 (2004) -- 7/10
-Blade: Trinity (2004) -- 4/10
-Elektra (2005) -- refused to watch
-Fantastic Four (2005) -- 4/10
-X-Men: The Last Stand (2006) --5/10
-Ghost Rider (2007) -- 3/10
-Spider-Man 3 (2007) -- 5.5/10
-Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007) -- 4.5/10
-Iron Man (2008) -- 8/10
-The Incredible Hulk (2008) -- 7.5/10
-Punisher: War Zone (2008) -- refused to watch
-X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009) 4.5/10
-Iron Man 2 (2010) -- 7/10
-Thor (2011) -- 7/10
-X-Men: First Class (2011) -- 7.5/10
-Captain America (2011) -- 7.5/10

Other Comic Films:
-Dick Tracy (1990) -- 6/10
-The Rocketeer (1991) -- 6/10
-Spawn (1997) -- 2.5/10
-Unbreakable (2000) -- 8/10
-Hellboy (2004) -- 6/10
-Hellboy II (2008) -- 5/10
-Watchmen (2009) -- 6.5/10
-Kick-Ass (2010) -- 7/10
-Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010) -- 7.5/10
-The Green Hornet (2011) -- 5/10
-Green Lantern (2011) -- 4/10

Monday, August 8, 2011

Review: Matthew Vaughn's "X-Men: First Class" (2011)

The first good X-Men movie. I think the previous X-Men films didn't all suck, but they were all facing the direction of suck. The first X-Men movie in 2000 was the better of the previous films. It introduced a childhood full of memories, so many beloved characters went from ink to live action. I think it may be possible for this movie to have really sucked and it get a slight pass. The movie had several problems, but those problems seemed to spread like a cancer as each film after it got worse and worse. In 2011 Matthew Vaughn found the cure. It is now his best reviewed film.

Matthew had just wrapped up "Kick-Ass", a crude action film with sex filled icing, and sprinkles of humor. Movies like that make me sick and excited, reminds me of a roller coaster. Just like a roller coaster, with age, they get to be less and less appealing to me. Had it not been for the crude sexual content, the film would have been much better. I think 'First Class' could have had some of that, but chose not to, making it better. Leave the crude at home, and use creativity to make the better bold original pieces.

'First Class' chose to star some very good actors alongside some mediocre ones. There were some flaws in the acting, throughout the film, but overshadowed by the better performances. Just about every scene with Michael Fassbender (Magneto) was stellar. Giving off the feeling that Tarantino was behind the camera in various scenes. Not one other actor in the film gave a performance in any scene comparable to all of Fassbender's. Fassbender carried the film from good to very good, a big leap.

The film lacked character development outside of Magneto, and even that was a bit fast and unexplored. Instead of exploring the character for more than a minute, I felt we were given several difference glimpses lasting seconds. While they looked good, it only lasted long enough in 2 scenes.

The cinematography was good, fine, dandy. Nothing comes to mind when I think amazing, but it was definitely satisfying. Costumes and set designs had a similar problem as "Thor" did, in that it sometimes felt claustrophobic, and some designs of characters I didn't care for. An example is the character of Beast. I didn't like that he reminded me of Teen Wolf. Teen Wolf sucks. Teen Wolf needed to leave the movie.

Kevin Bacon surprised me. I don't know what else to say about him. He wasn't amazing, but he carried his own when I gave him little chance.

When I think about 'First Class', I think about a few disappointments, and an amazing scene with Magneto in a pub. Magneto in that pub was the best sequence in the film, and if it were to loop, it could contend with some great films. The downside is that they connected this film with the others instead of trying to remake the series.

The film is a must see for thrill-seeking, quality film hunters. A must own for anyone who sees the film.

"X-Men: First Class"
7 / 10

Review: Kenneth Branagh's "Thor" (2011)

It's time to nerd out and examine another comic book movie. I did not know a whole lot about the lore and character before watching the film, but I probably knew more than most. God guy, holds a big hammer, breaks things... that guy.

The film has a great story, Thor aims to please his father outwardly while pleasing himself inwardly. In doing so, ends up breaking his father's law. When his father realizes the laws have been broken, confronts his son, failing to repent or turn from his mistakes, pushes on in trying to justify the decisions. His father then banishes him from their world to Earth, a place which equally matches his selfishness, a place where he belongs. Thor's father makes himself available in the form of his own hammer and casts it to Earth, available only to Thor if and when he comes to realize his dependence on his father for his power, turning away from his selfishness. Thor does, and is enabled to lift the hammer, redeemed, able to confront his mistakes and fix his mistakes. Then he is embraced again by his father.

The character development was sufficient, but sufficiency isn't something I settle for. I would have preferred to explore the characters a bit more than the film did. I think the film was too excited to include too many characters for the sake of something grander than it really was. Yes with the lingering existence of an 'Avengers' film, but this is supposed to be a focused introduction film, not a pre-Avengers film.

The film was shot with unique style. The slow motion was fine, sometimes better than fine. I don't like how rushed everything is in the film, every place you go, everything you see, you only see it for a second. Nothing is really explored beyond introduction.

I was excited during the film. The story made me feel most of the emotions it wanted me to. However, the sets were causing me to feel a bit claustrophobic. The town Thor fell to and spent most of his time in, felt like a town of 2 people while the villain who enters the town is supposed to be threatening the planet. I don't believe the threat is that great when his power goes from erasing people and things from existence to simply igniting things on fire. These things are easily overlooked when something significant is happening, and I believe the only significant thing in the movie was the story.

The acting was mediocre at best. I am not a huge fan of Portman and haven't seen enough of Hemsworth. There wasn't a huge demand from their performance so their mediocre performance doesn't stick out as much. I believe any C or B-list actress could have filled the roll for Portman, and Hemsworth perhaps replaced by any muscular B-list actor.

The costumes and such looked fine, everything seemed to look the part regardless of preference. But I did wonder where Thor's helmet was for 99% of the film.

If you haven't seen the film, see it. If you have seen the film, I bet you have your calender marked for when you can again.

"Thor"
7.5 / 10

Review: "The Lincoln Lawyer" (2011)

Good old Matthew McConaughey. He seems to find roles of the same value, none of them of any significance. This was a film scripted for the 90's, a crazy out of the world, see through court room drama. Everything the film tried to tell us was a secret, was obvious. There was no real trickiness to it, and even if there were good tricks, its like good sandwich meat wrapped in moldy bread. There is nothing in this film that makes it passed mediocre. If you want to vegetate on the couch and watch something with no expectations of a good time, and don't have ANYTHING else to do, then MAYBE as you flip through the channels on your T.V. you MIGHT pick this movie over "Dog Whisperer".

The movie might not be too bad for those who don't care about quality of film vs. a cheap thrill. But I consider myself a conasour of quality, and I reject this one. If I saw this movie being given away at Walmart for free I might take a copy. McConaughey is just boring to watch on anything, and come to think of it, I am not sure if there was ever anything I saw him in that he didn't cause me to feel bored.

The film isn't shot with high expectations, the crew seemed to just do their job rather than strive for anything other than normal Hollywood standards. In every scene, you are reminded that the ideas have been recycled already, time and time again. Skip this movie if you can.

"The Lincoln Lawyer"
5.5 / 10

Saturday, August 6, 2011

Review: Greg Mottola's "Paul" (2011)

Greg Mottola previously helmed "Adventureland" and "Superbad", and with some similar humor, created "Paul". Greg Mottola is not a very moral, or modest man. He lets the monster off the leash in each of his films, allowing for crude sexual humor, mocking religion and law, and embracing the breaking of the law with a heavy emphasis on drugs and alcohol. In "Superbad" it was a crude film about teenagers chasing sex and alcohol. In "Paul" you get a couple of adults, an alien, and a bag of drugs and out comes a see-through comedy with minor humor shown in each of the movie's previews, allowing for no real enjoyment. The puns on law enforcement and religion is also a page frequently used, and I was convinced this movie was going to be something special, until the same old jokes which are pouring out of all the D-list flicks are run dry.

Seth Rogen provided us with some slightly funny moments as the alien's vocals, but just too tainted by the not-so creative team writing the movie. I keep hoping for a funny Simon Pegg / Nick Frost film since "Shaun of the Dead" but I am constantly let down.

There aren't any scenes which were striking to me, nothing more than a couple of losers, with a loser CG character, a loser story, with a loser direction. All is lost.

Box this film up and send it into the $1 bin at Walmart, where it will be forever. If you have the chance to see this movie, don't. You will feel less defiled, and there are plenty of things you could better spend your time on, like clubbing your toes with a hammer.

"Paul"
4.5 / 10

Review: "Battle: Los Angeles" (2011)

I found a picture from the film that accurately describes my reaction to it.

If you thought "Independence Day" was bad, this has broke new ground for you. This movie is one giant "welcome to erf" audio clip of Will Smith. This movie is anything but subtle, anything but interesting, and anything but original. I wasn't sold on this movie sucking too bad until I saw Michelle Rodriguez's face in the movie trailers, then I knew. I saw it because I wanted to experience the American male's desire for bullet's and explosions. Boy was there bullets and explosions. It is just too bad nothing that happens makes me care or believe anything the movie is telling me.

Everything the movie introduces continuously makes the whole project worse. Every scene is worse than the previous. There isn't a single character developed, not a single good scene or shot in the film. The action is simply bad. The director spent too much time in boot camp and not enough time thinking about how to translate "real" to film. The film felt too adamant about portraying a "real" soldier instead of concentrating on filming a decent movie. This movie seemed to exist for the sake of creating video games. If you could find a youtube video of a 4 year old with a water gun, it would be a better movie than this one. This movie was embarrassing. There is nothing good to be had. If someone asked me to create a list of the top 1,000 alien movies, this would not be on it.

"Battle: Los Angeles"
2.5 / 10

Review: John Wells' "The Company Men" (2010)

John Wells makes his directorial debut with "The Company Men" in 2010. The film stars Ben Affleck, Tommy Lee Jones, and Chris Cooper, a story about corporate downsizing and the greed behind powerful business owners. Ben Affleck is one man who suffers from a rich man's panic button.

The film's most interesting man is Tommy Lee Jones' character, an aging wealthy man, contemplating morality in big business's decisions. Had Tommy Lee Jones not played in the film, I suspect a very large weight would have been added to Affleck, it would have crushed him, and the film. Affleck again seems to barely hold his own.

I think the film was a good one, and could have landed in the pile of most Hollywood productions about 'evil big business'. John Wells does a fine job carrying the film, giving us a few glimpses of characters with some decent development. I do think however, the character developments in the film could have made this film much more relevant. I don't feel like I really knew Ben Affleck's character very well, the story just tried to show me what it was he was doing instead of showing me WHO he was and WHO he is as he is doing things.

The timing of the film will make this film better now than it may be in 10 years, since it is so easy to hate big business right now. I would not venture to say this film is a must-see, but rather a film to see if there isn't much at the local Redbox to choose from.

"The Company Men"
6 / 10

Review: Michel Gondry's "The Green Hornet" (2011)

In 2004 Michel Gondry directed "Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind", a very good film, maybe Jim Carrey's best film. Then moved on to Dave Chappelle's Block Party" in 2005 and "Be Kind Rewind" in 2008 for a couple of less significant projects. In 2008 he wrote and directed "Tokyo!", a film with mixed reviews, with bizarre written all over it.

When I think about Michel Gondry and his filmography I am fixated on 'Eternal Sunshine' only. I would like to think a director who basically starts with this film would move on to bigger and better things, but time is proving me wrong with so many examples. "The Green Hornet" was one of these examples.

"The Green Hornet" stares Seth Rogen, and as much as the cast tries, it just cannot make up for the horrendous story and choppy cinematography. Michel Gondry appears to have entered into the longest line in Hollywood, the sellout line.

The film is absurd. It has no identity. Its funny, not. Its an action, eh. Its a drama, not. The film is just terribly boring. It is hard to find the words to describe my thoughts for this film. If you absolutely hate "Rush Hour", this movie might make you change your mind on a day you are forced to pick between them.

To think this movie was released in 3D, just proves the goal of everyone involved in creating this pile of dung. They wanted in on what was "cool", taking from everything new and successful to make a Razzie worthy film. If I were going to say one good thing about this movie, it would be... that Seth Rogen hid behind a mask for most of the worst scenes, allowing me to lie to myself, "its not him".

"The Green Hornet"
3.5 / 10