Showing posts with label Seth Rogen. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Seth Rogen. Show all posts

September 8, 2023

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem.

Review #2083: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem.

Cast: 
Micah Abbey (Donatello), Shamon Brown Jr (Michelangelo), Nicolas Cantu (Leonardo), Brady Noon (Raphael), Ayo Edebiri (April O'Neil), Jackie Chan (Splinter), Ice Cube (Superfly), Maya Rudolph (Cynthia Utrom), John Cena (Rocksteady), Seth Rogen (Bebop), Rose Byrne (Leatherhead), Natasia Demetriou (Wingnut), Giancarlo Esposito (Baxter Stockman), and Paul Rudd (Mondo Gecko) Directed by Jeff Rowe and Kyler Spears.

Review: 
“The first tentpole we planted in the ground was authenticity. We wanted it to be a real coming-of-age teenage movie. Past versions of the Turtles have been muscular and ripped, and few teenagers are as jacked as many of the Ninja Turtles have been. They need to look like real teens. Lanky. Awkward. Maybe not comfortable in their bodies yet.”

Admittedly, my familiarity with the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles is pretty limited in the art of actually watching it. I vaguely remember viewing the two first live-action films in 2011 and 2013 and that is essentially it. As you may already know, it all started as a comic created by Kevin Eastman and Peter Laird in 1983 with the original idea of doing a one-off parody of comics of the time, which happened to involve teenage mutants, animals that talk, and, well, ninjas; they self-published the comic, to shocking success. There have been a handful of television shows (yes, one for pretty much each decade of adolescent) and now seven feature films. Interestingly enough, this is only the second animated film, with the only other one being TMNT (2007), which also featured a handful of name actors in supporting roles...but this is the first one of any of these to feature a primary cast of teenage actors for the lead four characters. The film had five credited writers: Seth Rogen, Evan Goldberg, Jeff Rowe, Dan Hernandez, and Benji Samit (of note is that while each did the screenplay, the latter of the five was not responsible for the story); it is Rowe who has noted that the script required a good deal of re-working when it came to the structure of the main characters being in high school at a certain point. You may or may not recognize Rowe as the co-director behind The Mitchells vs. the Machines (2021), having previously done work on Gravity Falls and Disenchantment; as for Spears, this is his feature directorial debut. The inspiration for the film was multi-layered, with the evident one being to find their "North Star comic book look" (as described about what made Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018) so successful), which led to plenty of inspiration from sketches that one would make as a teen that led to a result involving fiddling with the frame rate and other ideas that were meant to look like it was done on purpose. 

Perhaps there is no better reference material to show clips of Internet videos about martial arts training to go alongside clips of Jackie Chan kung fu films. Admittedly, coming-of-age stories are a dime a dozen, but it never hurts to have one that tries to cut a message involving acceptance that makes for a solid film for those who know exactly what to look for within entertaining animation and a few decent jokes and action sequences. I appreciate the heart the film has, one that manages to show an interesting quartet of youths that will likely please people already quite familiar with turtles in a half shell while also seeming interesting enough for those less familiar (ones who aren't "green with envy", you might say). The credit for the film can go to the filmmakers first or second, but the fact that the leads (Abbey-Brown-Cantu-Noon) make fun with improv and charm as raw youths (who want to be high schoolers, go figure) that makes me chortle rather than bristle, but I suppose one has their own varying milage when it comes to cliche patience. Besides, they make a good grouping with Chan, who basically reflects with Cube when it comes to the presentation of "our makeshift family vs. the world", and on that note, Cube makes a solid threat in hardened scorn that isn't just a goofy threat (well, Superfly is only a name). The rest of the cast is generally fine in not being just a noted goofy voice, as noted by folks such as Edebiri that keep the film on the level (for all I ragged Rogen on for The Super Mario Bros Movie, he is fine here). The action is done with clear energy that doesn't lose itself in murky staging, and the city landscape sure does look pretty well here, particularly when it comes to the final fight with its big freaky monster (involving horses). 100 minutes is a desirable length to spend with a serviceably executed film that plays it well with maintaining something to care about in youthful folks to go in a familiar story that is high energy silly fun. It's the kind of thing to switch on for those looking for a bit of mayhem with neat animation that will make ideas of seeking further adventures seem like a shell of a good time.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

May 5, 2023

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.

December 29, 2017

Superbad.


Review #1032: Superbad.

Cast: 
Jonah Hill (Seth), Michael Cera (Evan), Christopher Mintz-Plasse (Fogell/"McLovin"), Bill Hader (Officer Slater), Seth Rogen (Officer Michaels), Emma Stone (Jules), Martha MacIsaac (Becca), Aviva Baumann (Nicola), Joe Lo Truglio (Francis), Kevin Corrigan (Mark), Dave Franco (Greg), and Laura Seay (Shirley) Directed by Greg Mottola.

Review: 
I will admit that this film had slipped under my radar for probably longer than it should have, probably because this didn't seem like something that had much priority to do. In retrospect, Superbad is a movie that is worth seeing, in part because of how amusing it proves itself to be. Loosely based on the high school experiences of writers Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg, this is a film that is pretty raunchy through and through, but it is also a film that is cleverly built to be an entertaining piece that utilizes its actors and situations to make an excellent experience. It's the performances by the cast (or more specifically the main duo) that carry the movie consistently. Hill and Cera do a good job together, having numerous exchanges and moments that are pretty amusing along with compelling. They feel like real people because they don't feel like a cliche blank slate for raunchy things to happen to them just for raunchy's sake, having a degree of practicality that seems welcome. Mintz-Plasse does a pretty good job as well, having some good scene-stealing moments along with being fairly interesting to watch. Hader and Rogen prove to be an entertaingly fine supporting duo that make for some good laughs, particularly with Mintz-Plasse in the second half. The rest of the cast isn't as prominent, but it is interesting to see Stone in her film debut, and she definitely has a fine screen presence. The movie goes fairly consistently, not feeling like a drag even at 113 minutes for a comedy. It never becomes a movie with too much posturing for improvisation nor just a movie that is disgusting just for the sake of disgusting. The heart of the movie is Hill and Cera and their friendship, and it's an interesting one to watch because of the two; a weaker film would've just focused on merely getting alcohol (or getting rid of teenage angst, one might say) for the party without any focus on character, and it wouldn't have as much entertainment value. From beginning to end, this is a film that goes for laughs and succeeds wholeheartedly. It's a movie that is confident in what it wants to be and what it wants to say with its words (many of them being the kind one can't use in print) without sacrificing a good solid core of depth and care.

On this note, I would like to say that this is the last review for 2017 for Movie Night. Obviously I'll be back in 2018 to do more reviews, but it is nice to say that there was some fine consistency with the reviewing slate. This is the 140th review for 2017, or "Season 7", which by my count is a significant improvement from the 116 reviews from the year before and the 90 from 2015. It has been a fun ride doing these reviews and having some fun highlights, such as reaching landmark numbers such as 900 and the big 1000th review. It has also been fun to have watch numerous films at the movie theater (18) for this year, because that usually proves to be an interesting experience. In any case, thank you for reading these reviews, and I hope to see you in the next year.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

August 16, 2016

Sausage Party.


Review #830: Sausage Party.

Cast
Seth Rogen (Frank), Kristen Wiig (Brenda Bunson), Jonah Hill (Carl), Bill Hader (Firewater), Michael Cera (Barry), James Franco (the Druggie), Danny McBride (Honey Mustard), Craig Robinson (Mr. Grits), Paul Rudd (Darren), Nick Kroll (Douche), David Krumholtz (Kareem Abdul Lavash), Edward Norton (Sammy Bagel Jr), and Salma Hayek (Teresa del Taco) Directed by Greg Tiernan and Conrad Vernon (#162 - Shrek 2 and #651 - Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted)

Review
Not to understate this too much, but this isn't a movie for everyone (hence the R rating, a first for a CGI animated film - by the MPAA, anyway), especially not for kids, obviously. It's definitely a different kind of animated movie, and I'm sure there's even plans (or new inspiration) to do more of these kind of films. As ridiculous as this movie was, it at least was an adequate in terms of quality and length (88 minutes). There is a semblance of plot in this movie, with regards to the food and a "Great Beyond" outside the store, amidst a bunch of easy jokes that are either funny for some, or just stupid. For me, it was a bit of both, but it works on such an absurd level of ridiculousness that fit fine enough. The opening minutes feature a song, no less, with about as much absurdities as one would expect (let's not forget about the song by a meat loaf). Here's how I would put this movie: I laughed numerous times, with barely an ounce of shame to that laugh.

The ending to the movie is certainly a strange one, and to explain it would sound downright weird. But it works on an absurd level of lunacy for me, even if it's not really exceptional at animation, but it certainly works better that if it had been in live action. Rogen is a well enough lead, and anybody who's seen him in a film before will know what they think about the movie. Wiig is also decent, and the supporting cast is pretty quirky enough, with Krumholtz and Norton having some interesting chemistry with each other, and Kroll being a fair enough villain. Hader is also a fine highlight. Animated movies are somewhat thought of as a kid's market, so the idea of one for adults isn't too terrible, considering the amount of ones made for the lowest common denominator. They both pander, but this one has some sort of goal in its potty mouth. It has its moments of entertainment, It's exactly what you expect, so take it for what it's worth. It also might be better with a friend or two, so you can comprehend the weird crudeness for yourself. I can't recommend it for everyone, but anybody looking for a quick time of something a bit different might like it. They might also look at their food a bit differently afterwards, however.
Okay, if you scroll over this text, here's the climax: The food murder people in the store and have sex.
Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

July 31, 2016

50/50.


Review #825: 50/50.

Cast
Joseph Gordon-Levitt (Adam Lerner), Seth Rogen (Kyle Hirons), Anna Kendrick (Katherine McKay), Bryce Dallas Howard (Rachael), Anjelica Huston (Diane Lerner), Serge Houde (Richard Lerner), Andrew Airlie (Dr. Ross), Matt Frewer (Mitch Barnett), and Philip Baker Hall (Alan Lombardo) Directed by Jonathan Levine.

Review
It's not so much that the movie has a good balance of comedy and drama, it's that it handles its subject matter with enough sensibility to be more than one might expect. The writing (by Will Reiser, who had also had cancer, with his experience being the basis for the screenplay) is what helps the film gain ground almost immediately, with the actors having good chemistry with each other. Gordon-Levitt is excellent, showing a range of emotions without an ounce of insincerity, and he is a likable (if not perfect, but understandable) lead. The scenes with him and Rogen are handled pretty well, having some laughs (including the shaving scene), but also some fine scenes of drama, especially near the end. Kendrick is enjoyable to watch (while one could question her decisions as a therapist, the suspension of disbelief is enough to alleviate for this film), having a quirky charm that works nicely (I also know someone who has a bit of stuff on the car floor whenever I hitch a ride with them, though some of that is school stuff). While her and Gordon-Levitt have some decent scenes together, the movie thankfully doesn't try to refocus as a love story near the end, keeping itself focused but also keeping true to these characters, without coming off as strange as something like The Bucket List (#640) was. There's a decent supporting cast, with my favorites being Frewer and Baker Hall, who (while not in the movie for long) provide some dry elements that fit well with the film. Before I repeat myself over and over again, I'll just say that it's a nice movie that keeps itself balanced, with an excellent cast being the forefront alongside a well handled plot.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

November 26, 2013

Movie Night: Kung Fu Panda 2.


Review #486: Kung Fu Panda 2.

Cast
Jack Black (Po), Angelina Jolie (Tigress), Gary Oldman (Lord Shen), David Cross (Crane), Jackie Chan (Monkey), Seth Rogen (Mantis), Lucy Liu (Viper), Dustin Hoffman (Master Shifu), James Hong (Mr. Ping), Michelle Yeoh (Soothsayer), Danny McBride (Wolf Boss), Dennis Haysbert (Master Storming Ox), Jean-Claude Van Damme (Master Croc), and Victor Garber (Master Thundering Rhino) Directed by Jennifer Yuh Nelson.

Review
Naturally, there is a sequel, given the first film's massive success. The film take a somewhat darker turn, but it works well to the film's advantage. Jack Black once again is effective, and he certainly leaves a good impression. The rest of the cast, especially Gary Oldman do good, and Oldman arguably does a better job portraying a villain then Ian McShane in the first film. The story is fine, and the animation is good, especially the animation during the flashback scenes. The action is good, and the comedy is nice, and this is a very effective film that leaves you yearn for more, especially with that ending, which is always welcome with me.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

November 25, 2013

Movie Night: Kung Fu Panda.


Review #485: Kung Fu Panda.

Cast
Jack Black (Po), Angelina Jolie (Tigress), Dustin Hoffman (Master Shifu), Ian McShane (Tai Lung), Jackie Chan (Monkey), Lucy Liu (Viper), Seth Rogen (Mantis), David Cross (Crane), Randall Duk Kim (Master Oogway), James Hong (Mr. Ping), Dan Fogler (Zeng), and Michael Clarke Duncan (Commander Vachir) Directed by John Stevenson and Mark Osborne.

Review
This may sound a bit odd, but this is the 16th DreamWorks Animation film I've reviewed, perhaps in some way that makes a whole deal of sense, because the films always had a hook to keep my interest, and kept me intrigued. Well, most of the films (I'm looking at you, Shark Tale and Shrek the Third), not all, but a very big majority always had a sense of fun with fine animation. This I'm happy to say, continues that trend. Jack Black does a very fine job, but he's not the only one, even Dustin Hoffman gets in on the laughs, with him and Black having very effective scenes that contribute to a very fun film. The animation is breathtakingly nice to look at, DreamWorks Animation, no matter what decade, always did seem to keep up and look excellent (with one notable exception, of course). The villain is excellent, though seeing him not as much as everyone else is fine with me. This is a fun film that goes along extremely well, is fun for everyone, and overall, it's just a grand hallmark for DreamWorks Animation, once again. Now then, what's next?

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

November 23, 2013

Movie Night: Horton Hears a Who!


Review #483: Horton Hears a Who!

Cast
Jim Carrey (Horton), Steve Carell (Mayor Ned McDodd), Carol Burnett (Sour Kangaroo), Will Arnett (Vlad Vladikoff), Seth Rogen (Morton), Amy Poehler (Sally O'Malley), Dan Fogler (The Councilman and Yummo Wickersham), Jesse McCartney (JoJo), and Isla Fisher (Dr. Mary Lou LaRue) Directed by Jimmy Hayward and Steve Martino.

Review
When my enthusiasm after watching The Day of the Doctor today finally quieted down, I found something to watch, another familiar friend from the past. I've reviewed films based off the works of Dr. Seuss before (#210 - The Cat in the Hat and #301 - How the Grinch Stole Christmas), which ranged from mediocre (but understandably fine at Christmas time for others) to being awful enough to inspire me to make a poem about it. But anyways, making a Seuss story adapt to animated form is a really good idea, given that making effects for things like say, a speck, or an elephant, are more convincing then say...the makeup that made up the Cat in The Cat in the Hat for example. Then there's the film itself, and it's...okay, I suppose. Shockingly (I know, right?), it's probably the best Seuss film adaptation I've seen (excluding The Lorax, which hasn't been reviewed), but that's also kind of sad, when you think about it long enough. Once again, Jim Carrey stars in a Seuss film, and he...I don't know what it is, but his performance bugs me. Maybe it's the script, or possibly the multitudes of times where it seems he loses all subtlety, but he doesn't provide too many laughs. Steve Carrell on the other hand does bring me joy, and he makes me wonder why I haven't ever reviewed anything else he appears him. Carol Burnett does a fine job as...the villain, I suppose. I don't know if you can call her a villain, but she makes the best of it. The film is fine in the acting department and the visuals are excellent, and despite the brooding attempts of the pop culture references to get in the way, this is a fairly decent film that while not exactly a good film, it's probably the only Seuss film that I can recommend. That, or you could stick to the book, but oh well.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

September 10, 2013

Movie Night: The Green Hornet.


Review #451: The Green Hornet.

Cast
Seth Rogen (Britt Reid), Jay Chou (Kato), Christoph Waltz (Benjamin Chudnofsky), Cameron Diaz (Lenore "Casey" Case), David Harbour (District Attorney Frank Scanlon), Tom Wilkinson (James Reid), Edward James Olmos (Mike Axford), Jamie Harris (Popeye), Chad Coleman (Chili), and Edward Furlong (Tupper) Directed by Michel Gondry.

Review
This is one of those films I never had actually got to finishing twice. Around the end of the year (heh, big shock) when every test was done, our classes used to watch some films. The Green Hornet was one of them, though I never got to finish the film. Until now. Everytime I watched it, I had a few questions that popped in my head about the movie: So in the 1960's show, was Kato more useful than the Green Hornet? Was Kato always better in hero work than the Hornet? Why does it seem that the Green Hornet is eerily similar to Batman? And who is Seth Rogen? The answers to my questions are: There are none. Well, maybe one answer. The Green Hornet was created on radio in 1936, 3 years before Batman was, with comic books about the Hornet coming 4 years later, later spawning two serial films, a short 10 minute French film, and the short lived but memorable 1960's series with Bruce Lee and Van Williams. The history of the Green Hornet is probably more interesting than the film itself. What I mean is that Rogen doesn't provide too much to the table, he feels more like the comedy relief to Jay Chou than an actual hero. The Black Beauty is a beautiful looking car though, and the effects are halfway decent, though it can't make up for the mediocre acting and the mediocre story. This was meant to be a superhero comedy, but it feels more like a chore, and Waltz, while admirable in his attempts, can't liven the film enough. This would be a disappointment, but since I don't really know the Hornet, it's just a miss.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.