The Nice Guys Review

     Back in the 80s and part of the 90s, the buddy-cop style movie was all the rage. Series like "Bad Boys" and "Lethal Weapon" became huge box office draws and entertained movie goers all around the world. But in recent years that specific genre of film has become less and less popular. Off the top of my head the only two of those types of movies I can think of that came out recently were "Ride Along" (and its sequel) and "Let's be Cops" (none of which were good). It's hard to say why genres of movies gain and lose popularity over time, but most chock it up to the changing of tastes. And now in comes Shane Black. Black is most well known for directing the blockbuster hit "Iron Man 3," and the cult classic "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang." Apparently a few years back Black started to write a buddy-cop style script, but once finished had some trouble getting it made. After being passed around for a while it finally got green lit and started pre-production, and it was later announced that it would star Russell Crowe and Ryan Gosling in the lead roles. One of my most anticipated movies of the year; we finally get a look at "The Nice Guys." So now the question remains, can Shane Black save a genre that seems to be on its way out?

     Set in the 70s, "The Nice Guys" follows the story of two unlikely heroes; Jackson Healy, an enforcer who gets paid to beat people up, and Holland March, a private detective trying to work while making time for his daughter. When March picks up a case revolving around a dead porn star, he ends up trying to track down a young woman named Amelia; but when Amelia learns that she's being followed, she hires Healy to beat March up. After Healy does his thing, he heads back to his apartment where he's jumped by two goons looking for Amelia. He manages to escape and meats up with March to figure out what's going on. While reluctant, March agrees after Healy pays him a few hundred dollars. So the two set out to discover what's going on, little did they know this mystery was bigger than they could have imagined.

     In all honesty I have never seen Shane Black's first film "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang," I've only seen his second movie "Iron Man 3." So based off his previous movies, I wouldn't exactly call him a top notch director. But I must give credit where credit is due; "The Nice Guys" is fantastic. Black did an amazing job with this movie, and removed the bad taste left in my mouth from "Iron Man 3." He also co-wrote the movie, and as of right now it might be the best original screenplay we've seen this year. The plot acts as an interesting mystery, and is filled with more than a few funny bits that had me laughing until my sides hurt. The movie also does a great job using its 1970s backdrop to its advantage; the way the movie was designed and made makes it feel remarkably old school and actually reminds me of some of the movies from that era. What I feel most people will walk away with from this movie would have to be the performances. Every actor in "The Nice Guys" does a great job, and the two leads, Ryan Gosling and Russell Crow, have fantastic chemistry together and did a great job playing off each other. I also have to give credit to Angourie Rice, who played Gosling's daughter Holly. She gave a really good performance, especially for a kid, and had some of the best bits in the movie. I also have to touch on the action scenes, which to be honest caught me by surprise. There are a few shootouts and fist fights in this movie that are surprisingly well done and intense. They reminded me of the "Lethal Weapon" action scenes, and they are pure entertainment, my only real problem with this movie would have to be that at times the plot can get a little confusing. Every now and again the plot jumps around, and since so much happens it can be a little hard to follow. But if I had to guess I'd say that I probably wouldn't have these issues upon other viewings. "The Nice Guys" was a pleasant surprise; I hoped it would be good but was unsure what the final product would be like. But to my own surprise it turned out to be one of my favorite movies of the year so far, as well as one of the best. 

Pros: Great performances from the whole cast, fantastic chemistry from the leads, well written screenplay, very funny, interesting mystery, well done action scenes, great direction from Shane Black, good use of 70s backdrop, feels old school. 

Cons: Plot can be hard to follow at times.

4.5/5 Stars

Uncharted 4: A Thief's End Review

     Over the years Sony has had many icons for their PlayStation consoles. Crash Bandicoot, Ratchet & Clank, Sackboy, Kratos, Sweet Tooth, as well as several others. But since 2007, the character that has become PlayStation's most significant icon has been Nathan Drake. "Uncharted: Drake's Fortune" was released in 2007 to wide acclaim from critics and audiences, and was considered to be one of the PS3's first significant and outstanding exclusive games. Developed by Naughty Dog, the game was lauded for its impressive action set pieces, but more notably its storytelling. The plot, characters, and dialog were nearly universally praised, and was considered to be one of the finest single player experiences ever made. Two years later a sequel was released, "Uncharted 2: Among Thieves," which to this day is still considered to be one of the greatest games ever made. It improved upon its predecessor in every single way, and while playing it you felt you were in an "Indiana Jones" movie. And two years after that, a third game was released titled "Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception." While critics and audiences weren't quite as impressed as they were with the previous games, it still was the recipient of many "game of the year" awards from various publications. For years, people were certain that "Uncharted 3" was the final game in the acclaimed series. But in 2014 a sequel was announced, "Uncharted 4: A Thief's End." Originally slated for a 2015 release, the game was met with a handful of controversies, the lead writer of the series Amy Hennig leaving Naughty Dog, and technical issues resulting in the single player having a lower frame rate than originally planned, the game was pushed back to 2016. But now after two years of waiting it is finally out. And I can say without a doubt that not only was waiting for "Uncharted 4" worth it, the game ranks among the best I've played in years.

     Nathan Drake spent most of his life hunting for various treasures all over the world, but for the past few years he's left his wild adventures behind. He married the love of his life Elena, and works for a salvage company. Everything is perfectly normal until he hears a knock at his door, his brother Sam. After a job gone bad 15 years ago that resulted in Sam being shot, Nate assumed he was dead. Turns out he survived his wounds and has been rotting away in a South American prison. He escaped with the help of his cellmate, a notorious drug lord; and the only reason he helped Sam was because of pirate treasure. For years Nate, Sam, and their partner Rafe spent years looking for the lost treasure of Henry Avery, a pirate who in the late 1600s, with the help of various other pirate crews, pulled a heist that would be worth around $400 million. While in prison Sam told his cellmate about the treasure and that he knew where to find it, so in exchange for half the treasure he broke him out; the problem is that if he doesn't receive it in three months he'll kill Sam. Given no other option, Nate comes out of retirement one last time to save his brother. But of course, things are never easy with Nathan Drake. 

     I remember playing "Uncharted: Drake's Fortune" very shortly after its release back in 2007; I rented it from Blockbuster and played it non-stop since I had to return it within a week. Over the course of that week I fell in love with it and was excited to see where it would go. When the sequel was released in 2009, I picked it up on launch; and was blown away by how much of an improvement it was. My mom was so impressed by the game when she watched me play it she asked if she could give it a try. And in 2011 when "Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception" came out, I lost myself in that world again. A lot of people criticize the third installment in the series, but I still think that it's an amazing game with some truly memorable set pieces. Upon completion the third game I was sad; because I was sure it was the end. So when one final game was announced I was so happy, and going into 2016 it was my most anticipated game of the year. And after playing it, the game certainly met that anticipation. First off, I just want to say how happy I am to see these characters again. Nate, Elena, and Sully are some of my favorite characters in all of gaming and seeing them in action again is so much fun. I also really like the new characters, Sam and the various antagonists are a welcome addition to the series in my opinion. The "Uncharted" series has always been known for its top notch voice acting, and "A Thief's End" is no different. Every actor puts a lot of character and emotion into their roles. And as always, Nolan North is amazing as the game's lead character. For those who don't know, North is one of the most famous, experienced, and respectable voice actors in the business. When it comes to games, he's often considered the guy who put the profession on the map. And in this game he partners up with another voice actor who has become a legend recently, Troy Baker who played Sam. Over the past few years Baker has played the lead roles in "The Last of Us," "Bioshock Infinite," "Infamous: Second Son," "Middle-Earth: Shadows of Mordor," and "Tales From the Borderlands;" as well as playing the main villain in "Far Cry 4," Ocelot in "Metal Gear Solid 5: The Phantom Pain," and even voicing the Joker in "Batman: Arkham Origins." He really has become the go to guy for voice acting, and he was great as Sam. One of the biggest improvements over the previous games has to be the visuals. The "Uncharted" games have always looked good, but this one takes it to a different level. The graphics are incredible, the world design and aesthetics are beautiful, and impressive characters models make "Uncharted 4" the best looking game I've ever seen on console. The PS4 has been criticized for its lack of power in the past, but this game shows that a talented development team can get a lot out of the system. The game also has an astonishing level of detail, both in the environments and its interactions. During one portion of the game you slide down a rocky hillside, and if you shoot at the rocks you can actually cause them to slide. That is a level of detail that most developers would have ignored. But "Uncharted 4" is a showcase proving that Naughty Dog is the best development studio working right now. What has also improved is the overall gameplay. Everything feels more refined and tight. The previous games felt a little sluggish when you moved around, but I felt it a lot less with this one. The combat feels more dynamic and free-climbing feels more responsive. Now, what this series has always been lauded for has been its storytelling; and this installment is no different. The story is interesting and engaging from start to finish, filled with non-stop excitement, clever puzzles woven into the story, and astonishing set pieces and action sequences that I might never forget. The story and the dialog is well written and can go from happy and hilarious to somber and intense in a second. Very much like "Uncharted 2," this game manages the impressive feet of bridging the gap between video games and movies. The quality of the story telling, plot, dialog, set pieces, and performances feel like something you would expect from a big summer blockbuster. Making this one of the most exciting games I've ever played. In summation, I loved this game. It is the best game I've played so far this year, and one of the best games I've played in years. My complaints are minimal; the single player runs at only 30 frames per second which is a turn off for some people, and the big open-exploration areas can feel overwhelming at times. But other than those, I can't find much fault with this game. "Uncharted 4" is an astonishing piece of gaming that may go down as one of the best games ever made. As far as we know this will be the final installment in the franchise, if so "Uncharted 4: A Thief's End" is an incredible ending to one of the greatest series we've ever seen in gaming. 

Pros: Incredible graphics, improved and refined gameplay, beautiful world design and aesthetics, impressive character models, great characters new and old, interesting and engaging story, well written story and dialog, top notch voice acting, bridges gap between movies and games, amazing set pieces and action sequences, almost non-stop excitement, several clever puzzles, shows why Naughty Dog is the best studio working, impressive level of detail, an incredible ending to one of the greatest series in gaming, 

Cons: Single player runs at 30 fps, big open-exploration areas feel overwhelming.

5/5 Stars

Captain America: Civil War Review

     For years now, Disney has dominated the film industry with their massive Marvel Franchise. Consisting of 13 movies since 2008, the Marvel Cinematic Universe has dominated the box office with more than a few smash hits. Divided into phases, the franchise's second phase ended last year with the introduction of Ant-Man. Now phase three kicks off with one of the most anticipated movies of the year, "Captain America: Civil War." While the first "Captain America" was met with Luke-warm reviews, the sequel "The Winter Soldier" was met with much acclaim and is considered by a lot of fans to be the best Marvel movie. Many praised it for not just being an exciting action movie, but an intense spy thriller as well. It set a new standard for Marvel movies, and made "Captain America" the flagship series of the entire franchise. The latest installment, "Civil War," has had every fan jumping for joy since its announcement. Based off the comic of the same name, it brings in most of the existing characters in the franchise, as well as a few new faces that we've wanted to see for years. Made to set the stage for the movies to come, "Captain America: Civil War" might be the most important Marvel movie since "The Avengers." But not only does it manage to achieve those lofty goals, it stands out as the best Marvel movie made so far.

     About one year after the events of “Age of Ultron,” most of the Angers team are still together and fighting the good fight. But after an accident in Nigeria involving the Avengers that resulted in the deaths of several citizens from Wakanda, many of the world leaders started questioning the team. After that, a proposal was drawn up putting the Avengers under the control of the United Nations. While half the team, Led by Tony Stark, is on board saying that it's for everyone's protection, the other half, lead by Captain Steve Rogers, is against the proposal saying that it would take any sort of authoritative power the team had. While in Vienna at the ratification of the treaty, a bombing outside the building where the summit is being held results in the death of several innocent people. After security footage is released, many believe that the former Winter Soldier Bucky Barnes is behind it. An old friend of the Captain, he sets off to find Bucky but gets caught up in a whole new mess. With the team split in half, and many world governments against them, Captain America has to make a choice; do what he believes is right, or go against so many of his friends.

     Towards the beginning of the year I read a poll of a few thousand voters that claimed that "Civil War" was the most anticipated movie of the year, beating the likes of "Rogue One" and "Batman v Superman." And after seeing this movie, not only does it meet the high expectations people had for it, it greatly surpasses them. In short, "Captain America: Civil War" is the best entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe; and I'd go so far as to say that behind "The Dark Knight," it is the best superhero movie ever made. And the people behind this movie's greatness are the directors, the Russo Brothers. The Russo's were also the directors of "The Winter Soldier," and you can tell that they took what they learned from that movie and cranked it up to 11. And I am very happy that they will also direct both of the "Infinity War" movies. Like the previous movies in the franchise, "Civil War" is an always entertaining action movie at heart. But going even a step further than that, this is one of the best action movies I've seen in years. There were several incredible action sequences that are among film's greatest, and with some well done CGI and practical effects, the best stunt coordination I've seen since "Mad Max: Fury Road." But like "The Winter Soldier," this film is more than just another action movie. The story is exciting and engaging and always keeps you guessing. It also raises some interesting political questions that people could have long debates about. One of my biggest concerns going into this movie was about the two opposing sides of the movie. From the trailers they made it look like it was going to be hard to go against Captain America since he is one the side of personal freedom and making your own decisions. But they actually did a great job showing why Iron Man has made the choices he has. He makes some really good points about the greater good and taking responsibility for your actions, and I wouldn't be surprised if he changed a few minds. When it comes to performances, everyone did a great job. More than a few of the actors gave their best performances in their respective Marvel movies. But the movie didn't just have great returning actors, but some new ones as well. The MCU finally got its first look at Black Panther and Spider-Man played by Chadwick Boseman and Tom Holland, and they were fantastic. They both have the acting chops to pull these characters off and the portrayals as their heroes were great. Both stole a lot of the scenes they were in, and I immediately became excited for their upcoming movies. What really helped these characters was the movie's writing, which was great. The script and dialog was very well written, and the movie could turn from funny to heartbreaking in an instant. But with the story comes the film's single biggest problem, the villain. The entire movie, the villain was just used as a plot framing devices meant to move from scene to scene. I wasn't impressed by his plan or his motives, and by the end the reason he did everything just turned out to be cliché. Nothing against the actor who did a fine job, it's just that the character was so unmemorable; which is a shame because "The Winter Soldier" has one of the most intimidating antagonists of the whole franchise. Now this isn't a new thing, the MCU has had problems with making great villains in the past; but by now I was hoping they could fix that. But other than that one issues, this movie is damn near flawless. "Captain America: Civil War" managed to exceed my very high expectations and instantly become one of the best superhero/comic book movies ever made. It is exciting, action packed, and has a story that draws you in and never lets go. Marvel was looking to start off phase three of the MCU with a bang, and they managed to do that and then some. 

Pros: Best performances from the cast in Marvel movies, incredible action sequences, impressive stunt coordination, great direction from the Russo Brothers, funny and heartbreaking, well written dialog and script, engaging and exciting story, interesting politics, well done CGI and practical effects, always entertaining, great portrayals of new heroes, both Captain America and Iron Man have good points.

Cons: Unmemorable villain used only as a plot device.

4.5/5 Stars

Midnight Special Review

     Over the past few years we've seen a kind of changing of the guard when it comes to Hollywood's best directors. Legends like Steven Spielberg and Martin Scorsese have been on a down slope as of late, making movies far from their best work. But at the same time we've seen a new generation of directors come into their prime. Movie makers like Richard Linklater, Wes Anderson, and Denis Villeneuve have really separated themselves from the pack, and are already considered some of the best directors of their generation. But of all the film makers to emerge as of late, I think the one that really stands out has to be Jeff Nichols. Hailing from the American south, Nichols has only been making movies since 2008; with his debut film "Shotgun Stories" being met with critical acclaim. His next film "Take Shelter" garnered several major awards, and was considered one of the best movies of the year. And his 2013 film "Mud" was met with near universal acclaim, and according to aggregation site Rotten Tomatoes it was the fourth best reviewed film of the year. So despite being in the business for such a short period of time, Nichols is often considered one of the best directors working today. Now with his fourth film "Midnight Special," Nichols is trying something different. A sci-fi film inspired by the work of John Carpenter and Spielberg, Nichols has left his comfort zone of southern family dramas to try something new. And it might just be one of the year’s best.

     Roy is a middle aged man who, for years, was a member of a cult in rural Texas. While there he met a woman named Sarah and they had a son they named Alton. To their surprise, Alton has unexplainable powers, with the ability to absorb sunlight and release it in powerful bursts as well as the ability to pick up radio waves. Alton was then forcefully adopted by the cult leader who, along with the rest of the cult, worshiped him as some sort of spiritual figure. Fed up with the way his son has been treated, Roy rescues Alton from the cult with the help of an old friend. The plan was to get Alton as far away from the cult as possible. But the plans change when Alton discovers who he really is, and what he needs to do.

     Going into 2016, this was probably my most anticipated movie of the year, based solely off of Nichols's track record. And for a fourth time, he has churned out a fantastic cinematic experience. As always with one of Nichols's movies, the entire cast gives great performances. Michael Shannon in the lead role gives probably the best leading performance of the year so far, and co-stars Joel Edgerton, Kirsten Dunst, and Adam Driver do a great job as well. I also have to give props to Jaeden Lieberher who played Alton, child performances tend to be hit or miss, but he did a good job as his character. And I have to say that this movie is filled with likable characters. You root for the main cast from the opening minutes because all they're trying to do is protect this kid from people who want to take advantage of him. You're able to connect with them quickly, and you really want them to succeed. As I've said multiple times in this review, I think Nichols is an amazing director. And he shows us that again with this movie. He did a great job with this movie, bringing out excellent performances from his actors, as well as the way the story shifts and the transitions between scenes. But not only is he a great director, he is a great writer as well; "Midnight Special" is extremely well written, and the way the dialog unfolds is believable. People tend to say what you think they'd say in that situation. The movie's plot is both intriguing and mysterious, and it never lost my attention. Compared to his other movies, I feel "Midnight Special" is a lot more fun and entertaining. But with such an original and mysterious plot, the film's biggest problem comes up. If you see this movie, you're going to walk out of the theater with a lot more questions than answers. While leaving on such a mysterious note works for some movies, with this one it just leaves you wanting more. Despite that issue, I loved this movie. For all the reasons I mentioned plus the lovely score, beautiful cinematography, and gorgeous visual design highlighted later in the film. Jeff Nichols once again proves why he is one of the best. I really don't think there is a director currently working that is a good as he is. While it might not be his best film, "Midnight Special" is certainly the best movie I've seen so far in 2016. 

Pros: Great performances from the entire cast, mysterious and original plot, likable characters you root for, exceptional directing from Jeff Nichols, beautiful cinematography, well written script, always fun and entertaining, lovely score, gorgeous visual design.

Cons: Leaves you with lots of questions and few answers.

4.5/5 Stars

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Review

     Going back to 2013, one of the most anticipated movies of the year would have had to be Zack Snyder's "Man of Steel." The first live action portrayal of Superman on the big screen since 2006, it was a movie that many were incredibly excited for. Unfortunately, the final product was lackluster to say the least. It was a rather uninteresting origin story filled with little character development, bad writing, and questionable design decisions. In my opinion, it might have been one of the most disappointing movies in years. So when a sequel was announced shortly afterwards, I wasn't particularly interested. But when it was announced that Batman would play opposite to the titular hero, it got my attention. While there was an initial uproar about Ben Affleck playing the Dark Knight, many put their doubts aside when the first trailers premiered. So while "Batman v Superman" had all the potential in the world I still had my doubts, manly about the director. Zack Snyder has returned to as the director, but the problem is I don't think he's very good at his job. Other than "Watchmen," I've never liked any of his movies. He's the ultimate "style of substance" director, and many of the stylistic choices he makes don't turn out well when transferred to the silver screen. So going into this movie I had my doubts. And afterwards, almost all of them ended up being true.

     Eighteen months after the events of "Man of Steel," the world is still trying to recover from the earth shattering fight between Superman and General Zod. Thousands died in the attack on Metropolis, but people are getting by. Superman is trying to live the best life he can as Clark Kent with his Girlfriends Lois Lane, while trying to balance his duties as Superman. At the same time, Bruce Wayne has been investigating criminals all over Gotham in order to find someone named the White Portuguese, who might be bringing a dirty bomb into Gotham. But what he's even more worried about is Superman, who he views as a possible threat. On the other side of the planet, some young boys find a part of one of Zod's ships in the ocean. The part contains a large piece of kryptonite, which has been known to affect Kryptonians. The piece is bought by a man working for Lex Luther, who plans on weaponizing it in case they need to fight Superman. And not long after, these three forces start to collide.

     The idea of a movie that puts Batman against Superman sounds like an awesome one, the comic book rivalry millions of fans all over the world wanted to see. Unfortunately for those fans, the movie they've been waiting years to see is a mess. Let's go ahead and talk about some of the good. There are a lot of really solid performances in this movie. Henry Cavil did a much better job as Superman in this movie than he did in "Man of Steel." And Gal Gadot is a great Wonder Women; unfortunately though her character was underutilized throughout the movie. But surprisingly, the true star of the movie is Ben Affleck. When Affleck was announced to play the Dark Knight, people had flashbacks to "Daredevil" and thought he'd be terrible in the role. But he proves all the haters wrong, because he is fantastic in this movie. Acting both as Batman and Bruce Wayne, he was by far the best part of this movie. I also liked this portrayal of Batman as well; he's an older, tired Batman that doesn't have the same morals that we usually see from the character. He was so good that I'm now looking forward to the standalone "Batman" movie we're getting in a few years. And regarding the designs of the characters, I loved there costumes. They pay respect to the source material while looking different enough to be original. But of all the major stars in this movie, Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luther falls short. Eisenberg is a very good actor, but he did a bad job as this character. The portrayal of Luther annoyed me because all they did was make him crazy. He's supposed to be an evil genius, not insane. And the way Eisenberg acted was like watching Jim Carrey play Lex Luther. And while I'm still talking about the characters, I have to say Doomsday was wasted in this movie. His character design is terrible, they ruined his back-story, and they gave him powers that he wasn't supposed to have. Doomsday is one of the most iconic DC villains, but in this movie he is poorly done. One of my favorite aspects of this movie would have to be the visuals. The cinematography is great, and the CGI is well done (mostly). I'm also glad that Snyder decided to have some color in this movie, unlike "Man of Steel." But like I've already said, Snyder is a style over substance director. So while he a great job with the visuals, the story has more than a few problems. First off there are pacing issues, with huge chunks of the movie feeling out of place or downright uninteresting. Several of the movie's plot points also felt unnecessary; for example, there is a whole segment about Superman getting in trouble with the law that ends suddenly half way through the movie. And after it's over, I was left wondering what the point of it was. This movie also featured some pretty bad dialog. With many of Luther's lines being random and out of place, as well as dialog that hits you over the head with foreshadowing instead of having any hint of subtlety. The movie also featured a lot of lazy plot set-up. On more than a few occasions things happen very conveniently, for no reason. Like Doomsday's creation, the ending of Superman's legal troubles, the set-up for the fight between the two title characters, and worst of all the set-up for future movies in the series. Without getting into spoilers, there are cameos from other heroes. Early in the movie they allude to them in a subtle and clever way. But later on the reference them again in a way that is lazy and blatant. "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" had all the potential in the world. From a big budget to an impressive cast, but it ended up being a waste. And I can't help but feel that it really is Snyder's fault. While he can put together a good action scene, he can't direct a good movie. At this point Snyder has basically become Michael Bay, and that is far from a good thing. I feel this is going to be one of those movies that will divide audiences. There are a lot of people out there who really like this movie, as well as a lot of people who think it's bad. Unfortunately, I'm part of the latter group. I wanted to like this film, but I just can't get behind it. While I think the future of this new DC Universe is promising and has a lot of potential, "Batman v Superman" will likely be remembered with little fondness from many fans. 

Pros: Ben Affleck is fantastic as Batman, Henry Cavil gives a better performance as Superman, great cinematography and CGI, several cool action scenes, Gal Gadot is great as Wonder Woman, some well done costume design.

Cons: Pacing issues, unnecessary plot points, Jess Eisenberg is a bad Lex Luther, Wonder Woman is underutilized, wasted Doomsday, Zack Snyder still not a good director, forced cameos, lazy plot set-up, plenty of bad dialog.

2/5 Stars