Jennifer's Body.

Review #2457: Jennifer's Body.

Cast: 

Megan Fox (Jennifer Check), Amanda Seyfried (Anita "Needy" Lesnicki), Adam Brody (Nikolai Wolf), Johnny Simmons (Chip Dove), J. K. Simmons (Mr. Wroblewski), Amy Sedaris (Toni Lesnicki), Kyle Gallner (Colin Gray), Cynthia Stevenson (Mrs. Dove), Chris Pratt (Officer Roman Duda), Carrie Genzel (Mrs. Check), Juan Riedinger (Dirk), Juno Ruddell (Officer Warzak), Valerie Tian (Chastity), Aman Johal (Ahmet) Directed by Karyn Kusama.

Review: 

"I was blessed to read this script at a moment where the producers were meeting with directors and it just knocked me out. It was just so original, so imaginative. That’s what it is about this script and the world is that it feels like a fairy tale gone psycho and I think that’s what most fairy tales actually started as. So, they’ve just been sort of neutralized over the years and there’s something about this story that felt old, like coming from old stories but totally fresh, and I just went to bat for myself, I guess."

It isn't often you see a film poster that bills the talents of its writer, but here we are. In the buildup to the sensation that was Juno (2007), Fox Atomic (a short-lived label of 20th Century Fox and Searchlight that was aimed for comedy and genre film distribution) bought the rights to a certain script by Diablo Cody, the blogger-turned-stripper-turned-writer that, well, wound up winning an Academy Award for Juno (hence the film poster); Jason Reitman served as a co-producer for Jennifer's Body. Cody stated in interviews that she wanted to “pay tribute to some of the conventions that we’ve already seen in horror, yet, at the same time, kind of turn them on their ear" while also saying that her macabre sense of humor played into how it became a comedy-horror movie. As it happened, the movie was directed by Karyn Kusama. Kusama previously had directed Girlfight (2000) and Aeon Flux (2005). According to Cody, the movie (distributed by 20th Century Fox after Atomic closed down), which made nearly double its $16 million budget back in its release in 2009 was marketed terribly, as it apparently was marketed to target “boys who like Megan Fox” (which is how you get a poster that has Fox in a miniskirt) as opposed to trying to target, well, girls too; in recent years, with the growing cult audience for the movie, Cody has stated her wish to do a sequel to the movie, while Kusama noted her appreciation for the following the film has developed in recent years.*

It helps that the movie basically is a fairy tale of two growing women who have rapid change befall them, right down to the line actually said in the film of Hell being a teenage girl...that just happens to run with one of them becoming a succubus that actually reminds me a bit of Rosemary's Baby (hey, when the high schoolers get mowed down and "honored" in a manner not exactly more dignified than Heathers, why not crib from one of the alleged great horror movies too?). I thought it was a pretty funny movie, to be honest, mainly because I went in with mild expectations of expecting a bit of humor and gore that hopefully wouldn't crash and burn up and found a delight. Sure, you can probably understand where people may not have got what it really was going for 15 years ago beyond just leering at its star and waiting for things to happen. You've got a succubus who for her first act (that we see) of trying to cope with their new surroundings of desire go up to a person's house to try and eat an entire rotisserie chicken only to vomit goo, fail to bite someone and then just leave. In that sense, Fox does a tremendous job in the lead role, managing to be quite funny along with unnerving in the plight of a person who goes from a creature that might as well be the parasite in their one friendship to a very hungry creature that could be the parasite for all people (hey, an equal opportunity succubus) involved if she had her way. Her dynamic is compelling with Seyfried in ways that work far better than just simply being a creature bereft of comic timing. Seyfried's journey of change is just an interesting, mostly because it is a self-realization story that perhaps one of the miserable people lurking in the world today actually can get lucky for once beyond just being lumped in as a needy odd-duck. It is a worthwhile time to see the two of them engage in banter all throughout that shows just how one can really view somebody they've known for years when the grisly details are presented so clearly. The rest of the cast is fairly interesting in parts, whether that involves the conniving group of wannabee music icons led by Brody or the hook-handed straight-laced Simmons. The gore sequences (as could be read in some part here) involving the unfortunate souls being led in to the promise of, well, flesh (three) is pretty well done as well. The 102-minute runtime does prove worth it, although one wonders if the real ending is worth being in the credits. As a whole, Jennifer's Body is a delightfully macabre film about the perils of growing womanhood that happens to involve blood and guts for a solid curiosity that really did take time for its audience to really find it and appreciate its merits.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

*Hey, they even did a Q&A of the movie just this week. 

Hell of a coincidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRGd7sHN1io

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3.

Review #2006: Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3.

Cast: 

Chris Pratt (Peter Quill / Star-Lord), Zoe Saldaña (Gamora), Dave Bautista (Drax the Destroyer), Karen Gillan (Nebula), Pom Klementieff (Mantis), Vin Diesel (Groot), Bradley Cooper (Rocket Raccoon), Will Poulter (Adam Warlock), Sean Gunn (Kraglin), Chukwudi Iwuji (the High Evolutionary), Linda Cardellini (Lylla), Nathan Fillion (Master Karja), Sylvester Stallone (Stakar Ogord), and Maria Bakalova (Cosmo) Written and Directed by James Gunn (#626 - Guardians of the Galaxy and #932 - Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2)

Review: 

"In the end, my love for Rocket, Groot, Gamora, Star-Lord, Yondu, Mantis, Drax, and Nebula—and some of the other forthcoming heroes—goes deeper than you guys can possibly imagine, and I feel they have more adventures to go on and things to learn about themselves and the wonderful and sometimes terrifying universe we all inhabit."

Admittedly, the first Guardians of the Galaxy (as adapted from the second incarnation of the comic series of the same name, which was created by Dan Abnett and Andy Lanning) was a nice surprise when it came out in theaters in 2014. Sure, the Marvel push for a cinematic universe was already nine films in when it came out, but it wasn't hard for me to be surprised that a director I had not heard of managed to make a really neat adventure. Who wouldn't want something that sounds like a space epic ensemble? Of course, it's hard to not respect a director who also writes their own stuff, as was the case with James Gunn's prior two films with Slither (2006) and Super (2010). It set up other possible ideas for, well, other things, but the important thing that I remember most is that it had a sense of effervescent fun to it that was interesting without running into a joke just for the sake of it, with Gunn having an evident appreciation for these characters. The second film, released in 2017, was probably a sidestep direction in quality, but it did exactly what was required from a sequel in consistency (besides, as a resident Kurt Russell spokesman, I enjoyed him playing a villainous planet - such is life). Six years and appearances in varying quality and quantity (Avengers: Infinity War (2018), Avengers: Endgame (2019), Thor: Love and Thunder (2022), and The Guardians of the Galaxy Holiday Special (2022) - look I can't watch everything), here we are with a third and final film with this dynamic of Gunn and company. Oh, and it is one of the films in Phase F-Oh hell, if you care about cinematic universes (or making fun of streaming like I do), go ahead, I'm just here for the fun.

I suppose the quality of the film depends on just how much imagination one has in comparison to the director when it comes to seeing the culmination of various stories that have come with these characters over the past nine years. As the longest of the three films at 150 minutes, it tries to cover as many bases as it feels it needs to do in the idea of finding new horizons without turning into the longest group hug ever, complete with stakes that are more emotional than grand. In short: it is a clever way to tie things around when it comes to the stories of these characters without making it a goodbye show or just a vehicle of over-spectacle. It does have a few moments that could be considered disturbing, but one will likely be ready for anything if they have seen enough films with the middle-ground rating of "PG-13", you might say (personally, I fall on the side of not criticizing movies that dare to push a bit when it comes to that rating that lets the audience decide rather than go trying to recommend coddling, but whatever). Besides, if you can handle the influx of staged sequences of action where people are getting beaten a bit, I think you can handle animals in a cage. When it comes to performances, each get their own respective moments to shine besides the influx of scenes spent with talking animals (these scenes of Rocket are voiced threefold, incidentally, with Cooper doing adolescence, S. Gunn doing the young version, and Noah Raskin doing him as a baby) that loops right in to one last ride for a number of folks. Of course, the fact that Gillan has had an arc that saw her go from a second-tier adversary in the first film to an actual fledged member of the team with worthwhile time to follow along with in levity that fits quite well. Bautista, to the surprise of nobody, still provides the warmth required to balance the ensemble in timing and physicality in what makes for a worthy endnote (who among us would want to put on so much makeup forever, I suppose), which naturally makes for amusing banter with Klementieff and her useful timing again. Cooper carries the film along with pathos that makes it more than just a voice on motion-captured animation, one that makes it clear just how integral he has been to the series. The flashback sequences build that climax to where it has to go, and Cooper helps that make sense. Saldana does fine in essentially playing the straight one among the folks (while reminding of the middling idea of resurrecting her character from the dead in the first place), while Pratt holds his own with self-interest and charm, one that reminds me that just knows how to time things with general presence. Poulter makes for an amusing adversary when it comes to the mannerisms that come from a flying gold painted, uh, doof. 

Do I regard the movie as the best of the three? Well, that is an interesting point of discussion, because it probably has the best villain of the three films, that is for sure. Iwuji plays it exceedingly well in the art of irredeemable villainy that is compelling to see in all of his brilliant decadence without any ploy of sympathy or false note, which is necessary when it comes being more than just a villain who likes to pick on animals. His pursuit of perfection in the face of reality and the things around him is far more interesting when it feels in sync with no pretenses (so yes, sometimes you can have villains who might seem sympathetic, but this is not one of those days, thank heavens). It is a movie with worthwhile staging when it comes to action (such as one longshot scene) along with dialogue that works in tandem with the music choices to make a vibrant film that is more a resolution to new things rather than just a definitive be-all end-all film, which leaves the folks in a comfortable spot without playing it too safe (aside from maybe one post-credits scene). In the end, the movie is pretty good in the ways you would expect from a third film in a series that closes the loop on what had started in 2014 that will make most of the folks happy (or sad if you really get into it) with what they've seen over the years, whether that is warm enjoyment in the characters or in general.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Super Mario Bros. Movie.

Review #2005: The Super Mario Bros. Movie.

Cast: 

Chris Pratt (Mario), Anya Taylor-Joy (Princess Peach), Charlie Day (Luigi), Jack Black (Bowser), Keegan-Michael Key (Toad), Seth Rogen (Donkey Kong), Fred Armisen (Cranky Kong), Sebastian Maniscalco (Spike), and Kevin Michael Richardson (Kamek) Directed by Aaron Horvath and Michael Jelenic.

Review: 

Admittedly, waiting to watch a movie, particularly one that is projected to have plenty of viewers in theaters (as one would expect to do unless they are a streaming sucker), isn't the worst idea in the world. This goes double for a good chunk of films that could be watched by anybody, and it goes even more for a film based on a video game that I actually enjoy from time to time. You may remember that this is not the first film based on the video game series of the same name, as Hollywood Pictures had made Super Mario Bros. (released in May of 1993), a live-action movie that point blank sucked (spare me the cult classic argument). Nintendo has only allowed two of their franchises to be made into films, and the other is Pokémon (insert your joke here, since I know people who play it as adults), which with the exception of one (the 2019 detective spinoff one) are all animated. Of course, this is technically not the first animated Mario movie because of the 1986 anime Super Mario Bros.: The Great Mission to Rescue Princess Peach!- oh hell, let's just get to the other thing to briefly mention. You know, the only thing that I had hesitation with was not the fact that Pratt was cast as Mario. No, what I had a bone to pick with is one that is more of a recurring gripe that should be mentioned more for animated films: the gripe of seeing animated movies (whether made by someone like Pixar or not) that have very recognizable names voicing characters rather than familiar voice actors. Of course, as long as the movie isn't garbage like say, Shark Tale, this isn't much of a distraction, so feel free to remind me of name actors trying to play animation the next time it happens. The film is directed by Jelenic and Horvath, best known as developers of the animated series Teen Titans Go!

You know, it is at least interesting that video game movies have managed to seem a bit better in quality than what came out in the years around the new millennium. Anyway, the movie is fine. As with the Sonic the Hedgehog films (2020, 2022), it is pretty much exactly what it says on the tin, being fairly bright and charming that mildly goes to please everyone and doesn't stumble on most of the steps of the trip. As an animated film, it is the kind of colorful adventure that you would think would be in a film made by a studio in Illumination that I have seen exactly only one other film from them (Despicable Me). It is lightly plotted and lightly funny, which is totally fine, since not every movie is going to turn into a passioned debate over plot dynamics. It is evident that Pratt, alongside his name recognition, was picked because of the idea that he could play the role with blue-collar charm and heart. With that in mind, he does just fine. Given that Charles Martinet has voiced the character countless times in the last three decades, the best thing to be said for Pratt is that the two Marios are distinct without becoming a distraction, and Pratt makes a quality pair in terms of family chemistry with Day and his timid amusement. Taylor-Joy makes an assertive lead to make the proceedings interesting, as one would hope. How exactly does one judge Rogen when he has stated that "I don't do voices" when he is voicing a goofy gorilla? Let's put it this way: if you know and like Rogen, go right ahead, but if you want the tiniest bit more than just a name phoning it in, then, well, give me a break, because he gets outclassed by the warm goof in Key or even a real voice talent with Richardson. But at least Black makes a quality adversary, drawing most of the chuckles that balances might within delusions of grandeur that clearly made an effort to have fun with such a clear-cut role. You can't even say it is predictable because you pretty know what you are getting into with something that is meant to be honed for entertainment with general reference to its source material without doing half-baked renditions of what people think they want. The Mushroom Kingdom looks quite inviting, and the family story works just fine with the general adventure to make nobody seem extra, even if I could barely care for the idea of music veing used for montages (does the world really need a "Take on Me" usage?). As a whole, it is perfectly serviceable for an hour-and-a-half when it comes to fast-moving adventure that sets things up with patience while putting in little references that rewards those who care about such things without turning into a movie of goo. It invites the idea of another film without begging for it, which I would say is more than enough for a solid piece of entertainment.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Her.

Review #1566: Her.

Cast:

Joaquin Phoenix (Theodore Twombly), Scarlett Johansson (Samantha), Amy Adams (Amy), Rooney Mara (Catherine Klausen), Olivia Wilde (Blind Date), Chris Pratt (Paul), Matt Letscher (Charles), and Luka Jones (Mark Lewman) Directed by Spike Jonze (#1308 - Being John Malkovich and #1533 - Adaptation)

Review:

“There’s definitely ways that technology brings us closer and ways that it makes us further apart — and that’s not what this movie is about. It really was about the way we relate to each other and long to connect: our inabilities to connect, fears of intimacy, all the stuff you bring up with any other human being.”

If you make four feature films in the span of fourteen years, one can only yearn to have the breadth of curiosity and interest generated by the ones done by Spike Jonze. Filmmaker in features, short films, music videos, this is the fourth feature film (and most current as of 2020) for the director that are interesting for their distinct features in terms of genre that nevertheless verge on the point of yearning to connect with something or someone. Jonze was inspired to do the script in part on the experiences that he had briefly involving a website where one could exchange messages with an artificial intelligence program - and he wanted to capture the excitement of that moment of interaction between person and AI that he wanted to see play out longer than a few minutes. To me, it reminds me of Cleverbot, which I remember getting a brief kick out of having a "conversation" with a program that relies on human input to do said speech (of course one could also just find familiarity with Siri, but one does not engage in references to Apple). In any case, what could be a starting point for some sort of farce or something strange with AI on the loose is actually a film not about the technology but instead about the connections we have and don't have in the modern sense.

What we have is a film about what it means to have romance in an age of technological differences that make it clear about just how one can square a romance up into a neat little package ready for delivery. In other words, finding something to appreciate and care for is one thing, finding someone to connect with and find a place in is another. Love can be passionate, fleeting, star-crossed, or all the other words to draw upon when making their own love story for film. None could have gone as strangely or as off-kilter as this could have been, and none prove as interesting to see play out in most of its execution as this film does. It isn't exactly the best feature that Jonze has made, but it certainly proves a worthy curiosity for what it sets out to do with its lived-in look and color scheme that creates an intriguing challenge for its main star and voice to prove worthwhile without being a weird duck. If one can find themselves making pen-pals with people miles away from them or find friends on the Internet in certain communities, I can see where you can go with a virtual assistant that can either just be an organizer of your stuff or have it grow into something more. 2013 and 2020 are more than just years to say in a sentence when it comes to connectivity versus what really goes on in the little hole we make for ourself and hopefully for others, perhaps now more than ever, where numbness could almost be thought of as fashion sense. With all of that in mind, Phoenix is exactly the one to make this come across with the instinct and integrity required here, one that is meshed in clay of numbness that grows upon a path with romance that we do at least see some sort of connection to - loving the voice from a box is more than that when you share a smile that isn't a pained movement. Johansson was brought in to replace Samantha Morton (who Jonze liked, but he felt that the film needed someone different) - she does what is needed in terms of running the vocal gamut that is quite caring and useful in carrying the film in gentle marvel without having to even bat an eye. Others contribute to the other degree of varying connectivity, whether that means a sparkful Adams or an honest Mara (when compared to what we view and then hear of her) and brief interludes with television presence Wilde and Pratt. What we have here is a film structured on what we see and believe when it comes to feelings that can be consuming just as quickly as they seem fleeting, and there really are no easy answers beyond trying to keep growing and not become stuck with all the other voices of other lost souls. With a 126 minute run-time, it surely makes for an interesting original work that will leave the viewer by its ending with a chance to go out and find their own place to sit upon and connect the dots for themselves.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part.

Review #1190: The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part.

Cast:
Chris Pratt (Emmet Brickowski / Rex Dangervest), Elizabeth Banks (Lucy / Wyldstyle), Will Arnett (Batman), Tiffany Haddish (Queen Watevra Wa'Nabi), Stephanie Beatriz (General Sweet Mayhem), Charlie Day (Benny), Alison Brie (Princess Unikitty), Nick Offerman (MetalBeard), Jadon Sand (Finn), Brooklynn Prince (Bianca), Maya Rudolph (Mom), Will Ferrell (President Business), and Richard Ayoade (Ice Cream Cone) Directed by Mike Mitchell (#209 - Shrek Forever After, #890 - Surviving Christmas, and #1107 - Sky High)

Review:
The first film was an interesting film experience when it first came out five years ago. Phil Lord and Christopher Miller (who return to co-write the screenplay and the story) managed to deliver something that had plenty of humor alongside a charming story and captivating look that certainly made for a clear winner that kids and adults could enjoy (particularly if one was into playing with their bricks). In the years that have passed since its release, two spin-offs have followed (The Lego Batman Movie and The Lego Ninjago Movie) alongside a sequel at last to the original. Most of the cast returns to portray their characters while playing off the last scene from the previous one (involving Duplo blocks). The easiest thing to say is that the film is interesting to look at, with Animal Logic (provider of the animation for the four Lego Movie films) continuing to make for something that has a fun pallate, where nothing seems to be out-of-step while helping to make for some big ideas try to come to life, such as a dystopian wasteland (appropriately named "Apocalypseberg") or the big birthday cake. When it wants to be colorful, it looks pretty good with doing so, and it never feels unnecessary to look at. For the most part, the cast do a solid job, with no real weak element. Pratt does well with playing dual roles, continuing to make the former one have plenty of charm and being as lively as ever while making the latter role (based on roles played by Pratt in recent years) rugged and amusing. Banks also does a fine job, generating a few laughs while playing well with Pratt at times. The group of returning actors from the first film (Arnett-Day-Brie-Offerman) don't have as much to do aside from a few choice scenes (namely involving a song or two), but they do their parts just fine. Haddish is alright, giving a few laughs when needed. The brief moments in the real world with Sand, Prince, and Rudolph are fine (having one neat joke involving feet on a brick), even if Farrell only appears as a voice.

The film aims for more singing than before (including a take on the "Everything is Awesome" song from before), such as about a character not being evil or one about a song that will get stuck in your head; while I can appreciate the time and effort done to orchestrate musical-style numbers for these songs (and the others), I feel that their attempt to out-do themselves in the music department goes a bit too overboard at times, where it almost feels like noise instead of something really pleasurable. The jokes and gags work adequately enough, even if it isn't as funny as before, being goofy as ever but not quite executing as consistently with the lines. Perhaps it is the fact that it is a sequel that harms it more than anything, where they are trying to capture the magic again. Since the previous one had a twist that as executed in a pretty clever way (to where the second film builds on that by changing it from father-son to brother-sister), this one attempts to have its own kind of narrative shift, although it comes off as one that is a little easier to figure out, not having as much depth. Both films are driven on imagination (as a good film usually is), but I feel that this one is a bit more shaky with its message, particularly during its final act. In going for some goofy fun alongside its message of playing together, the ultimate result is something that is fine and dandy for its target audience with a fine 107 minute run-time. Perhaps it isn't as interesting as the previous one, but it will serve just fine for someone looking for some entertainment alongside their toys.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2.

Review #932: Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2.

Cast:
Chris Pratt (Peter Quill / Star-Lord), Zoe Saldaña (Gamora), Dave Bautista (Drax the Destroyer), Vin Diesel (Baby Groot), Bradley Cooper (Rocket), Michael Rooker (Yondu Udonta), Karen Gillan (Nebula), Pom Klementieff (Mantis), Elizabeth Debicki (Ayesha), Chris Sullivan (Taserface), Sean Gunn (Kraglin), Sylvester Stallone (Stakar Ogord), and Kurt Russell (Ego) Directed by James Gunn (#626 -  Guardians of the Galaxy)

Review:
With reviews like these, I generally try to avoid making it about the experience I had around watching the movie in a theater on opening week, mainly because I fear that it may come off as irritating to you fellow readers. But I do admit that the Marvel films (after nine years and 15 films) are generally entertaining along with being well crafted, whether watched alone or with others by me (with the latter applying this time around). The first Guardians of the Galaxy was a fun enjoyable time that had its shares of amusement and thrills, which definitely hit the right spot for me (I'm just surprised it was released three years ago). In any case, this is a fairly enjoyable sequel, and while it doesn't quite rise to the level of the first film, it still works just enough without just being a rehash. The story decides to split the characters up until around the climax (while thankfully not hinting at them breaking up or anything), and I think it helps in letting the film breathe a bit with the characters it tries to feature along with the action. The main group of heroes are all pretty well in their roles; Baby Groot is a neat highlight. Pratt does a fine job, having good chemistry with Saldana and Russell. Cooper and Bautista also do fine jobs. Rooker (a fairly neat standout in the first film) gets a more significant kind of role this time around, and he does a good job with that advantage, being quite fun to watch. Russell is naturally entertaining, and he does a fine job at delivering the gravitas one would expect playing a living planet as a character. Klementieff is also pretty good at playing a slightly naive but easily likable character that has some neat scenes with Bautista. The rest of the cast (such as Gillian and Gunn) are also pretty fine at the roles they play. There is certainly a degree of emotional depth this time around (reminding me of The Empire Strikes Back, at least in some part) that more often than not manages to hit the mark and not bog the movie down, especially when the movie has a great spectacle of effects and action to back itself up nicely at 136 minutes. Take it for what it is: Good ol' fun, with Gunn delivering a fun flick once again.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Bride Wars.

Review #630: Bride Wars.

Cast
Kate Hudson (Olivia Lerner), Anne Hathaway (Emma Allen), Candice Bergen (Marion St. Claire), Chris Pratt (Fletcher Flemson), Bryan Greenberg (Nathan Lerner), Steve Howey (Daniel Williams), Kristen Johnston (Deb), and Michael Arden (Kevin) Directed by Gary Winick.

Review
Zzzzzzzzzzz....hmm? Oh sorry, I was busy sleeping, it seems I decided to take a nap after watching this film, hoping to find my happy place. It didn't work. The movie is rarely entertaining but its worst problem is the lack of fun you get with these characters. I guess these characters were supposed to change over time as the movie goes on, though that really doesn't happen. The whole movie rides on a clerical error. Actually, I take that back, it rides on the stubbornness on one of these characters simply changing their wedding venue or just having a double wedding, instead they morph into vengeful people who do pranks on the other one that are less funny and more head-shaking, as explained above. The supporting cast is mediocre, I'm surprised that the main characters aren't too angry (or suing it for that matter) at the wedding planner even though it is responsible for this "war" occurring. This is at heart a boring movie that makes me wonder how sleep doesn't help me find that happy place. At least the next movie (and review) will be better than this, I promise you that. Zzzzzzzzz.....

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Guardians of the Galaxy.

Review #626: Guardians of the Galaxy.

Cast
Chris Pratt (Peter Quill/Star-Lord), Zoe Saldana (Gamora), Dave Bautista (Drax the Destroyer), Vin Diesel (Groot), Bradley Cooper (Rocket), Lee Pace (Ronan the Accuser), Michael Rooker (Yondu Udonta), Karen Gillan (Nebula), Djimon Hounsou (Korath), John C. Reilly (Corpsman Rhomann Dey), Glenn Close (Nova Prime), and Benicio del Toro (The Collector) Directed by James Gunn.

Review
When it comes to having a good time at the movie theater, picking a Marvel movie is usually a safe bet. And that rings true once again with this film, which is a real treat. Does it feel like a pastiche of other films? Maybe, maybe not, but I don't care, this...is just a fun movie to watch. The main heroes all work so well because they're not just a team of heroes, they're a team of rouges who are all different, weird, and yet so fun to watch. It surprised that of all the heroes in this film, it's Groot that is just so delightful to watch. Even if he's in the background he still manages to leave an impression. And Vin Diesel has just a few lines to convey his character in voice...and it works. Diesel manages to convey emotion with those lines, though the effects on Groot also help that, and Groot smiling is just fun to watch. The villain is alright, Pace at least does manage to do a good job under all that makeup, and I liked seeing Karen Gillian, she did a pretty good job in a minor role. The effects are really impressive, for both the characters and the action, it's a movie that is amusing but also thrilling as well. The ending credit scene is pretty amusing, movies don't usually end on Howard the Duck, but it sums how zany this movie is, and how enjoyable it is, from it's retro music (that has a purpose) to its characters to its willingness to just have fun. Go see it, you'll most definitely have a good time.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Lego Movie.

Review #540: The Lego Movie.

Cast
Chris Pratt (Emmet Brickowski), Will Ferrell (Lord Business and "The Man Upstairs"), Elizabeth Banks (Wyldstyle), Will Arnett (Batman), Nick Offerman (Metal Beard), Alison Brie (Uni-Kitty), Charlie Day (Benny), Liam Neeson (Bad Cop/Good Cop and Pa Cop), Morgan Freeman (Vitruvius), Channing Tatum (Superman), Jonah Hill (Green Lantern), Cobie Smulders (Wonder Woman), Craig Berry (Blake), David Burrows (Octan Robot), and Jadon Sand (Finn) Directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller.

Review
I grew up with LEGOs. I loved how even though it seemed to simple to build with, it was actually a complex but still excellent system, and I do still have them in my house somewhere. So naturally, I went to go see the movie based on them. Movies based off toys don't have the best track record here (#057-#058 Transformers 1-2, #201 - G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, #442 - The Garbage Pail Kids Movie, though #190 - The Transformers: The Movie wasn't half bad), but I went to the theater to see if the movie could break that trend. People who go to theaters have their traditions such as making noise, stealing discarded popcorn from people who've left the movie after it ends, commentating on the film, etc, etc. One of my traditions is to notice the amount of people waiting with me in line for a film...an hour before being allowed to go enter the theater, which either teaches the lesson to forever hate lines...or realize how big hype can be. And this film certainly does live up to the hype. The animation is beautifully done, meshing computer and the minifigure mannerisms that make Lego half of what is excellently. The cast is really excellent, Pratt does a fine job for such a normal but still special character. Ferrell is fun to hear, and the live action scenes he shares with Jadon Sand are touching and really effective. The movie has many moments of comedy, along with many moments of brilliance, and of course many moments of action, all three aspects make for a supreme combo of fun.The things that happen in this film really do bring me back to my younger days, hearing about the danger of gluing bricks together, having an average man be a hero, even the idea of a Lego Movie sounds like what I and probably others always wanted to do when we were younger. We probably didn't actually film these movies (Always hide your tracks in case it becomes an Old Shame years later), but yeah. The movie's greatest strength is the love and care the filmmakers have for the subject matter, and combined with the multitudes of people at my theater laughing and loving this movie, The Lego Movie is a great experience to watch, and is a delightful surprise for young and old. I may heap a high rating for this film, but in this case, I don't mind.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.