The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug Review

Note: I saw this film at a high frame rate in 3D, and while the 3D is well done I still do not like the high frame rate.

Few worlds have encapsulated the human imagination as J.R.R Tolkien's Middle Earth has, and few ever will. In 1999, director Peter Jackson took on the daunting task of translating Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" trilogy into film. The result would turn out to be one of the greatest film trilogies of all time; but after the series ended it left many fans wanting more, so Jackson ultimately decided on turning "The Hobbit" (a prequel book to TLOTR) into a trilogy itself. The first installment entitled "An Unexpected Journey" was released, and while it was a major box office success it was met with negative reviews from many critics and fans of the Middle Earth universe; many questioned Jackson's decision on turning the book into a trilogy as compared to a single installment, a trilogy made sense for TLOTR because it already was a trilogy but the Hobbit was only a single volume. Many weren't sure if there was even enough content to turn into three movies. So with the second installment in the new trilogy, Jackson obviously looked to silence many of the critics by addressing the almost many of the problems people had with the first one. And fortunately, he manages to improve upon the last movie in almost every way. "The Desolation of Smaug" starts off what seems to be a few months after the events of the previous movie. Our marry band of misfits consisting of Bilbo Baggins, Gandalf the Grey, Thorin Oakenshield and a dozen other dwarves are still trying to reach the Lonely Mountain in order to retrieve the Arkenstone so Thorin can be named the king under the mountain. At this same time they are all being hunted by a group of orcs, and they barely escape with their lives on more than one occasion. The group needs to be at the mountain within a few days, and they are running out of time fast. They are required to go through a now sick forest inhabited by giant spiders, but once their almost out they get captured by a group of elves. While in their custody, Thorin is summoned by the clan’s leader who is the same man who refused to help the dwarves when their homeland was originally attacked; the king offers to make a deal but Thorin refuses. After being imprisoned for a short time they manage to escape and make it to a nearby trading town; but with the orcs right on their tail and time almost up the group is on the brink of defeat, but they refuse to give up. While I had problems with the previous film, I still really enjoyed it; but I did feel a little let down. The Lord of the Rings trilogy are some of my all time favorite movies, but An Unexpected Journey didn't have the same magic as the previous films; The Desolation of Smaug manages to recapture that magic, and has turned into one of my favorite films of the year. One of the biggest problems with the previous movie was that a lot of people just thought it was kind of boring, but TDOS is much more exciting and also has the more serious tone of TLOTR films while maintaining several humorous moments. One of the standout features of TLOTR films was that they were gorgeous and Peter Jackson continues that tradition with this film, while it doesn't have the huge landscapes like the other films the cinematography is still top notch. Also like all the other films, Jackson employs some really amazing special effects people. While most of the CGI looks great overall, there are a few times where the CGI isn't on par with the rest of the film. Ever actor in the film was cast perfectly and does a great job in their parts. Although one of my biggest problems with the film is that there are too many characters doing too many things at once. In the previous film, the entire movie revolved around Bilbo, Gandalf, and Thorin, everyone else were just supporting characters. In this one, you have like ten important characters all doing their own thing; it takes away from the continuity of the main story line. There are also a few characters that were put into the movie that weren't in the book, most notably Legolas and Tauriel. It was really awesome to see Legolas again and Tauriel is a really cool and badass character, but I'm not entirely sure if they were really necessary. But now that we have all that out of the way, let's get to the important stuff; we all have the same question about this film, "how's Smaug." The answer? He's as awesome as we all hoped. Smaug is voiced by Benedict Cumberbatch, and he was the absolute the perfect choice. His voice fit Smaug perfectly, and they add the right amount of distortion to his voice. The design of Smaug is fantastic; he is massive and looks just how I imagined him. Smaug is some of the best CGI you'll see in a movie all year and is worth the price of admission alone. The Desolation of Smaug acts as a huge improvement over An Unexpected Journey in almost every aspect, his movie reminded me what I loved about the Lord of the Rings trilogy. If you've loved any of the Middle Earth movies you'll love this one, but it certainly won't bring any new fans of the series. If you're planning on going to the theater any time soon, you can't go wrong with The Desolation of Smaug. 

Pros: Every actor plays their character perfectly, more exciting and serious than previous film, beautiful cinematography and CGI, funny but not forced comedic moments, Smaug is f*cking awesome.

Cons: Too many characters doing too many things, some CGI not up to snuff, some characters shoehorned in, still don't like high frame rate.

4.5/5 Stars

Oldboy Review

Remaking a movie has always been a questionable act in the film industry, especially when it's a remake of a really great movie; so when it was announced that Spike Lee would be remaking one of the best and most beloved movies of the past twenty years, people were rather upset. In 2003 South Korean director Park Chan-wook released a film entitled Oldboy, based off the manga series of the same name. The movie obtained instant success, garnering several awards as well as being a box office smash. And over the years Oldboy became a cult classic, especially in the United States, with many considering it one of the greatest movies ever made. Noted for its action scenes, creativity, sense of humor, and mind blowing twist, the movie has since become a classic. So I'm not sure what possessed Spike Lee to direct the remake, but the deed is done; and unfortunately, it can never be undone. Spike Lee's Oldboy follows the story of Joe Doucett, an alcoholic advertising executive and all around mess. After messing up a meeting with a potential client, Joe goes on a bender and wakes up in a motel room. Almost immediately Joe realizes there is something wrong, he's been kidnapped. While channel surfing the TV in his room, he comes upon a news show explaining how his ex wife has been killed and he is the number one suspect. One day his room is gassed and he passes out, he wakes up inside a chest in the middle of a field. He's been released after twenty years of imprisonment. Joe wants two things, to reconnect with his now grown up daughter and get revenge on his captors. Remaking a great movie is not an easy task, they rarely match the original; and unfortunately Spike Lee's Oldboy is no different. While the movie is filled with impressive actors, Only Josh Brolin as Joe stands out. The original Oldboy has one of the coolest fight scenes you'll ever see in a movie, it's a four minute long single shot from of the protagonist facing off against about thirty opponents with 2x4's in a hallway wielding only a hammer. In the remake it has a similar scene but changes it up enough to be distinct, it's a cool fight scene but feels kind of cartoonish compared to the original. It does that thing where even though the hero is surrounded, the bad guys attack one at a time while the others are in the background swinging their weapons around for some reason. One thing to note is that the remake is much more gruesome than the original. When I went to go see the movie, a couple people actually walked out during a particularly brutal torture scene. One of the problems with remaking a movie is that the remake usually lacks any sort of originality, and Oldboy is no different. Lee's version just feels like a less interesting and poorly made version of the original. He tries to change some parts up, but ultimately they're still to similar to the original. If you ask anyone who's seen the original what they remember most, everyone will say the twist ending; it's a brilliant part of the movie that changes everything. The biggest problem with the remake is also why anyone who's seen the original can go ahead and avoid it; Spike Lee uses the same twist from the original. He tries to change it up and add some elements that weren't in the original, but it's still the same ending. If you haven't seen the original you might find the remake interesting, but if you have you'll just end up leaving the theater mad. Part of me wants to commend Spike Lee for having the confidence to remake this movie; the other part of me wants to slap him for taking an amazing movie and making a subpar remake. I really can't recommend this movie, even if you haven't seen the original; there are a lot better movies in theaters right now. If you haven't seen the original, go watch it on Netflix because it is a really great movie. While it has its moments, the remake is just a dull, uninspired copy; I remember sitting in the theater and thinking to myself, "I wish I had seen "Frozen" again instead."

Pros: Some cool fight scenes, Josh Brolin gives a good performance, will probably be enjoyable for anyone who hasn't seen the original.
Cons: Lacks originality, some scenes are based too closely off the original, uses same twist as the original, brings nothing new to the table.

2/5 Stars

Frozen Review

Back in the day, Disney was the king of animation. For years they stood unchallenged atop their throne, but over the past twenty years challengers have risen up. Pixar and DreamWorks have made a real name for themselves, especially with the introduction of best animated feature at the Oscars. But since they have risen, Disney has fallen. For the past couple years the quality of Disney's animated films have fallen; we'd get a good one here and there like Tangled and Wreck-It-Ralph, but none that we'll remember fondly years from now. Earlier this year Disney released a teaser trailer for their new movie Frozen and it was pretty funny. So I decided to keep my eye on it. Well it's finally been released, so is this the instant Disney classic we were all hoping for? It very well might be. Frozen takes place in the mythical kingdom of Arendelle and follows the story of two princesses, Elsa and Anna. The older sister Elsa was born with the power to conjure ice and snow. This is something the public can never know about, so her parents keep her concealed within the castle in the hopes of containing her powers. After a terrible accident, the king and queen pass away which means Elsa is next in line. When she comes finally comes of age to take the crown, the castle doors are opened for the first time in years. But while at her coronation, her powers are revealed and she runs away in fear. She heads into the mountains, and accidentally covers the land in an eternal winter. Ana decides to go after her in the hopes she can put everything back to normal, but all on her own she isn't well suited. Along the way she meets Kristoff, an ice salesman whose business is in jeopardy. So the two set off save both the kingdom, and Elsa. I'll go ahead and make a prediction, Frozen will win best animated feature at the Oscars this year; this is easily the best Disney movie in years. I must say this is a beautiful movie, the animation is great throughout. It's especially cool to see Elsa wield her ice powers. The animation style is similar to Tangled, which makes sense cause it's by the same team. Disney has always been known for its great characters, and Frozen is no different. All the characters are likable and well written, and are complemented by fantastic voice acting. Olaf the snowman who is introduced about a quarter of the way through the film is one of the funniest characters you'll see in a movie all year. Almost every line out of his mouth is hilarious, and those that aren't are sincere and heartfelt. But out of everyone, Idina Menzel steals the show as Elsa. Idina is a Tony award winning actress most known for her part in the Broadway play Wicked, and goddamn can that woman sing. She performs the movie's stand out song "Let it Go" and she kills it. I would not be surprised if she won an Oscar for best original song. While she is amazing, she is totally underutilized. She sings two duets and her one solo and that's it. One thing you need to know is that this movie has a whole lot of singing; it's really like classic Disney movies where people will just break out into song. While I do feel that some songs were forced to fit a certain scene, there isn't a bad song in the movie. Composer Christopher Beck did a great job and should get an Oscar nomination for his work. Like the older Disney movie, Frozen is funny when it wants to be and sincere when it needs to be. There are some very touching and sad moments in this movie, you really feel for these characters. But it's not all tears and sadness; there are more than a few scenes where I was laughing my ass off. I will say the movie is aimed more for kids, but is certainly enjoyable for the whole family. Frozen is the best animated film of the year by far, and probably the best in the past couple years. The movie works on every level an animation should. And what it does best is bring back what we loved most about the old school Disney movies. Frozen is easily my favorite movie of the year as well as one of the best. If you loved movies like Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King or essentially any Disney movie with singing from the 80's or 90's, Frozen is not a movie to be missed. 

Pros: Lovable characters, very funny and emotional, great animation, fantastic voice acting, award worthy soundtrack, feels like classic Disney. 

Cons: Some songs feel forced, aimed more at kids, Idina Menzel is underutilized.

4.5/5 Stars

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire Review

Every few years we get a new series that takes the film industry by storm. Harry Potter became a worldwide sensation and the highest grossing movie franchise in history. Twilight, as bad as it is, made billions and broke box office records. And now the Hunger Games is in the spotlight and people are going crazy for it, because nothing says fun like a bunch of teenagers killing each other. Based off the acclaimed book series by the same name, the story of Katness Everdeen is certainly one I can get behind. An underdog willing to sacrifice herself for her family and fight for her people, and unlike Twilight Katness is a likable and empowered lead character that doesn't whine all the time and want to date a sparkly vampire. Catching Fire is the second installment in the series and takes place what seems to be a few months after the last movie. Katness is back home before having to go on a winners tour due to her new found fame, but all she wants to do is stay with her family and put all this behind. Before leaving she is visited by the president who wasn't too happy that both her and Peeta survived the games, she has even become a beacon of hope for the rebellion against the government. So by threatening her family he plans to keep her on a short leash hoping she won't say anything that will start a revolution. So her and Peeta set off on the tour and put on their best happy face, but in reality there's still a bit of tension between the two from the previous games; but the world thinks they're in love so they have to go with the public image for their family’s sake. After an incident at one of their stops, sh*t hits the fan. The rebellion is right on the verge of happening and Katness is the face of it. So the president starts to scheme, and with some advice from the new head game maker he formulates the perfect plot to get rid of Katness. For the 75th Hunger Games, the tributes will be picked from previous winners; and being the only woman from district 12 to win, she's entered by default. Put up against trained killers, Katness is in for the fight of her life; you don't win the Hunger Games, you just survive. I was not a big fan of the last Hunger Games movie, I thought it was pretty good but not a movie that I was compelled to watch again soon after. Catching Fire is a vast improvement over the last movie and I really liked it. The writing in this movie was quite a bit better than the last one, I was told Catching Fire was the best book in the series and you can certainly see the improvements from the first movie. Catching Fire is a bit more CGI heavy than the last movie but fortunately pulls it off, nothing looks cheap and lack luster like the dogs from the first movie. The actual tournament is also a lot more entertaining than the first one. In the last movie I actually thought some of the action scenes were boring but in Catching Fire they are pretty badass. Jennifer Lawrence does a great job as Katness, and while everyone in the film does a good job she stands head and shoulders over them. Another improved aspect would be the love triangle between Katness, Peeta, and Gale. It's a lot less annoying in this movie, but still suffers from some sappy moments. A surprising part that I liked was the political aspect; we get a real good look into the capital and the presidents thoughts. In the last movie we were just told that the capital was evil, but in this one we actually see it. But what I loved most about this movie is actually something they decided to take out since the first one, no more shaky cam. The cinematography in the first movie wasn't great, and the shaky cam was out of control. In this one the overall cinematography was much better and they took out the shaky cam all together, which made me happy. While a big improvement the movie still manages to have its flaws. While less annoying the love story has more than a few sappy moments. The movie also suffers from the occasional cheesy line that sounds forced and out of place. Catching Fire also feels a little too long, it's not a super long movie but by hour two you're ready for the director to wrap it up. It also takes a too long to get to the games; while it was interesting to see more parts of this world it takes over an hour for them to make it into the arena. Perfect it is not but Catching Fire is a huge improvement over the last movie and one of my favorite films of the year. Its themes on hope and survival are very compelling, and are complemented by some very intense action sequences. It's very easy to see why this series is so loved and has become a worldwide sensation. And as for myself I'm certainly looking forward to the next installment in the series, Mockingjay Part 1. 

Pros: The games are much more entertaining than the last movie, good writing, interesting political aspects; Jennifer Lawrence is great as Katness, no more shaky cam.

Cons: A little too long, some cheesy lines, while less annoying the love story certainly gets sappy, takes too long to get to the games.

4/5 Stars

The Starving Games Review

Have you ever seen a movie and then afterwards you're actually angry? Unfortunately for me that happens a lot, especially with spoof movies. Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer are two directors and screen writers you may not have heard of, but you probably know some of their movies. They are the guys behind Date Movie, Epic Movie; Meet the Spartans, Disaster Movie, and Vampires Suck. If you don't know any of these movies let me sum them up for you, they're f*cking awful. I'm fairly sure these guys actually hold the record for most Razzie nominations. The last movies these guys put out was Vampires Suck which came out in 2010. Since then we haven't heard anything from them which is fine by me. But out of nowhere they release a new movie, and like their other movies it's still awful. The Starving Game is a spoof movie parodying The Hunger Games, the Avengers, the Expendables, Avatar, Sherlock Holmes, The Great and Powerful Oz, Harry Potter, Angry Birds, and Taylor Swift. Now I'm not going to go into the plot, it is just a stupid version of the Hunger Games. All you need to know is a girl named Kantmiss Evershot (I'm serious, that's the best they could do) who volunteers to represent her district in the starving games, a tournament where teens and children fight to the death. The only decent aspect of this movie is that you might get an occasional chick every once in a while (mostly at its own stupidity), every other aspect of this movie is as bad as you'd think. The writing, directing, acting, and production value are some of the worst you'll see this year. The movie is also short, there's only about 65 minutes of actual content. The last ten minutes are just a blooper role, it's obvious that the directors have no self respect but who actually ends their movie with a blooper real? To be honest there isn't a single reason to see this movie, there are a lot better ways you can spend your time. I just watched to give it a really bad review, mission accomplished. 

Pros: An occasional chuckle.

Cons: Terrible writing, directing, acting, and production value. It actually ends with a blooper real.

1/5 Stars