The Perks of Being a Wallflower (2012) Review

THE PERKS OF BEING A WALLFLOWER (2012)
Director: Stephen Chbosky

Writer: Stephen Chbosky

Producers: Stephen Chbosky

Editor: Mary Jo Markey

Cinematography: Andrew Dunn

Music: Michael Brook

Starring: Logan Lerman, Emma Watson, Ezra Miller, Mae Whitman, Johnny Simmons, and Paul Rudd

Best Credit: Chelsea Zhang as "Shakespeare Girl"

Runtime: 1 hour 42 minutes

Rating: PG-13 (mature themes, drug use, sexual content)

Genre: Drama, Romance, Indie

Release Date: October 12, 2012

Intro: When I first heard about this movie, I just discarded it as, to quote Anthony Bourdain, "hipster crap." I thought it was a movie that only the kids listening to unnecessarily obscure musics would like, since everything I saw about it indicated that's exactly what it was. Then the other day, I was at a friend's house and my group of friends decided to watch it, so I went along with it, mainly for the sake of hanging with my friends and writing another review. It turns out that it was more than I thought it would be. The Perks of Being a Wallflower, despite its indie-ness and somewhat lack of originality, is a very well-made movie with excellent acting, a great script, and an emotional roller coaster of a story.

Plot: Emotionally troubled14-year-old Charlie (Lerman) has just started high school after a rough middle school and finds it even worse. He is very shy, has no friends, and the other kids pick on him. He soon meets a bullied senior named Patrick (Miller) and his friend Sam (Watson) who introduce him to their group of friends and take him under their wing and teach him how to live in the moment and make it through high school and his emotional problems.

Things people may find “objectionable”: There's a lot of references to sex, but there's nothing explicitly shown or anything. Also, there are some physical confrontations and several references to drug and alcohol use by underaged people. The most disturbing part of the movie is the backstories and the stuff that happens off-screen, since all of the characters have a very bad time and have dealt with a lot of serious problems. The movie was initially rated R, but it won the appeal. This definitely isn't one to take small kids to, even if there's not much violence.

What was Good/What I Liked:

     -Characters/Emotional Involvement: This was clearly the thing the movie emphasized and where it succeeds the most. All of the characters are very scarred and have had terrible things happen to them, and this gets emotional at times. Also, if you've ever been lonely and friendless in high school, you should definitely feel for Charlie at the beginning of the movie.

     -Directing/Cinematography: The movie was the complete vision of Stephen Chbosky, who directed, wrote, and produced the movie based on his own novel by the same title, which came out in 1999 and was a New York Times Bestseller. To say Chbosky did it all would be a bit of an understatement. And for a novelist, the guy isn't bad at directing. There are some interesting visuals and camerawork, though they are not the focus of the movie and aren't as dazzling as the kind of stuff you'd see in Prometheus or Star Trek: Into Darkness.

Indie-related picture. And completely true.

     -Acting: Very good acting. Everyone gives a good performance in their respective roles. This is actually the first time I'd seen Emma Watson act, since I haven't seen the Harry Potter movies (I read the books, so I don't need to), and I must say, she's pretty good. Also, Logan Lerman gave a fine performance as Charlie, the main character. The rest of the cast was great as well.

     -Script: Very good script. It was well-written (it should be considering the author of the book wrote the screenplay) and had several memorable lines. I think there are already blogs and stuff with quotes from the movie on them. The script could also be inspiring to some who are looking to be inspired to live life in the moment. Personally, that's not my type of thing, but for some people it would really strikes a chord. 

    -Story: The story and stories told in the movie and how they all worked together were very good and engaging. The overall story was very interesting and well-told. The stories themselves were interesting, but somewhat predictable (See originality).

     -Music/Score: A good score, from what I remember. There are also a lot of connections to indie bands and a lot of that type of music was played. I'm not a huge fan of indie bands and most alternative music, but it did work well with the movie.
     -Humor: There were some nice funny touches in the movie, and the comedic moments were welcome comic relief from the heavy drama.

What Could Have Been Better/What I Didn't Like:

     -Originality: I felt a few of them ended kind of predictably, or at least went in predictable directions. I like a movie that keeps me guessing what's going to happen. When I see a movie, I also want to experience something I never have before, and though Perks of Being a Wallflower was good, I felt it didn't provide this. Many of the themes and storylines seemed like things I've seen before.

     -The Indie-ness: I'm the first to admit I'm not a hipster or a lover of indie films. The movie clearly plays to this audience, though its appeal is more broad. It just seemed like it was being intentionally artsy and making the hipster crowd seem like the cool ones and the way to go. I don't have a problem with this way of thinking, but its pretentiousness kind of annoys me, and I see some of this in the movie. This is just a matter of preference, though. This style works better for some people than others.

     -Action/Suspense: There was emotional tension, but hardly any action. Don't see this movie if you want to be thrilled. If you go in seeking an action flick, prepare to be disappointed. This doesn't detract from the movie, and there is emotional tension to make up for it, though.

     -Intelligence: You really won't get a deeper meaning out of the movie by thinking. This doesn't detract from the movie, but you really don't need to think to hard to understand everything.

Final Score: While maybe Perks of Being a Wallflower wasn't everything I heard people saying it was, the movie was very well-made and, for the most part, engaging to watch. Though it wasn't the most original and the indie-style and emphasis may not be everyone's cup of tea, I would recommend seeing it just due to how well it is made. It's definitely a cut above what the stereotypes for indie films, coming-of-age stories, or high school-centered films are. 

Enjoying my reviews? Like my Facebook Page.

Star Trek: Into Darkness (2013) Review

STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS (2013)
Director: J.J. Abrams

Writers: Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, and Damon Lindelof

Producers: J.J. Abrams, Jeffrey Chernov, David Ellison, Dana Goldberg, and Paul Schwake

Editors: Maryann Brandon and Mary Jo Markey

Cinematography: Daniel Mindel

Music: Michael Giacchino

Starring: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinro, Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, Benedict Cumberbatch, and Alice Eve

Best Credit: Ser'Darius Blain as "USS Enterprise Red Shirt"

Runtime: 2 hours 12 minutes

Rating: PG-13 (intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence)

Genre: Sci-Fi, Action, Adventure

Release Date: May 16, 2013

Before Watching the Movie: Just know you don't have to be a Trekkie or have seen the previous movie in the series to understand and enjoy Star Trek: Into Darkness.

Intro: Let me just start out by saying that I am in no way a Trekkie. My only experiences thus far with Star Trek are this movie, its prequel, and cultural references. Therefore, if you are looking for a Trekkie's perspective on the movie, look elsewhere. Anyway, after liking the original reboot, Star Trek, I was excited to see the sequel and also see J.J. Abrams' last film project before embarking on Star Wars Episode VII. Star Trek: Into Darkness is the perfect summer blockbuster. It's fun, extremely exciting and entertaining, and has amazing visuals and a good dose of emotion and humor as well.

Plot: After the events of the last movie, Star Trek, the crew of the Enterprise led by Kirk (Pine) and Spock (Quinto) gets in trouble for interfering with the fate of an indigenous tribe on a planet they are exploring. When they return to Earth, Star Fleet is very angry with Kirk, even though he is one of their better pilots. However, a terrorist attack on a  base in London by one of Star Fleet's own prompts the Fleet to get Kirk and his team to find this man (Cumberbatch) and bring him to justice. 

Things people may find “objectionable”: The main thing is violence. There is a lot of intense action throughout the movie. Also, there is some mild swearing, but no f-bombs and it's not pervasive.

What was Good:

     -Characters/Emotional Involvement: It takes more than you'd think to get me emotionally invested in the characters in a story, but I really did feel for all the characters and got pretty emotionally involved. This is good, especially for a summer blockbuster, where usually not a lot of emphasis is put on the characters or the emotional response. 

     -Music/Score: Very good score that helped the movie a lot. I really like composer Michael Giacchino, who has also written the scores for the first Star Trek movie in the new reboot series, The Incredibles, Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol, Up, and Ratatouille.

     -Adrenaline: Intense movie from start to finish. It really hooks you in right away with action and hardly ever lets up. The movie is essentially a thrill ride that will definitely keep you on the edge of your seat.

My reaction to the movie, for the most part

     -Directing/Cinematography: Absolutely beautiful visuals. The movie looked stunning. The shots were all picturesque and really added an extra level of enjoyment to a movie. I think cool visuals are kind of my weakness. It's easy to get me to like a movie that looks beautiful and/or has a lot of interesting shots. I think that's one of the main reasons I liked Skyfall so much. J.J. Abrams' efforts here give me a lot of hope for Star Wars Episode VII.

     -Acting: Pretty good acting, especially on the part of Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, and Benedict Cumberbatch. I really like Chris Pine as Kirk. He plays the perfect noble yet wild captain and is part of the reason you like the character so much. No one's going to win an Oscar for this movie, but the acting is decent.

     -Humor: Not a ton throughout the whole movie, but here and there, there are some funny lines, especially coming from Kirk, who at least at the beginning of the movie is a bit full of himself.

     -Special Effects: All the special effects were done very well, as expected for a movie of this type. The movie is total eye candy, and the special effects add immensely to its gorgeous look.

What Could Have Been Better:

     -Story: The story was kind of silly, but it's a summer blockbuster, what do you expect? There were also some unexplored subplots that were never really resolved and were kind of left open. The story was cohesive and didn't have a ton of plot holes, but it was just kind of silly. If you just go along with it while watching the movie and shut your mind off to it, the movie is thoroughly enjoyable. 

     -Script: Not the best, but it worked. Some of the lines, I felt, were a little cheesy and predictable, but they worked for the most part. I mean, unless you're paying attention, you don't notice it that much.

     -Intelligence: Not as mindbending as the first entry in the series (no time loops or anything weird like in the first one). Still entertaining, but it didn't require a ton of brain power to understand and enjoy.

Final Score: Star Trek: Into Darkness is more than your typical summer blockbuster. Though it has some weaknesses in its story, it delivers a more emotional response and better characters than most in its genre. It is a thoroughly enjoyable movie, and I recommend seeing it if nothing else for the visuals, which are spectacular. I am guessing this is probably going to be one of the best, if not the best, summer blockbuster 2013 has to offer (I liked it even better than Iron Man 3). Abrams' effort also gives me a lot of hope for his next project, Star Wars Episode 7.

Enjoying my reviews? Like my Facebook Page.

Iron Man 3 (2013) Review

IRON MAN 3 (2013)
Director: Shane Black

Writers: Drew Pearce and Shane Black

Producers: Jon Favreau, Stan Lee, Louis D'Esposito, Stephen Broussard, Victoria Alonso, Alan Fine, Dan Mintz, Charles Newirth, and Lars Winther

Editors: Peter S. Eliot and Jeremy Ford

Cinematography: John Toll

Music: Brian Tyler

Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Don Cheadle, Guy Pearce, Rebecca Hall, and Ben Kingsley

Best Credit: Naomi Parshin, Aurelia Rose, and Johanna Yunda as "AIM Ping Pong Girls."

Runtime: 2 hours 10 minutes

Rating: PG-13 (intense sci-fi action and violence, language)

Genre: Superhero, Action, Sci-Fi

Release Date: May 3, 2013

Before Watching the Movie: Just know that it isn't necessary to see the other two Iron Man movies or The Avengers beforehand. Really all you need to know is that Pepper (Gwyneth Paltrow) is Stark's girlfriend and that his friend Rhodes (Don Cheadle) was given an iron man suit and works for the government. The rest is pretty-well explained or easily picked up. It's very possible to go into Iron Man 3 without ever seeing a Marvel movie before and enjoy it just as much as someone who has.

Intro: Iron Man 3 is one of those movies that I knew I was going to see as soon as I heard it was being made. I've seen the other two Iron Man movies and enjoyed them and I had also seen The Avengers. I expected it to be a fun summer blockbuster, as that's pretty much what all of Marvel's movies are. Iron Man 3 definitely lived up to this expectation. The movie had a fairly weak story, but if you ignore this and dwell on what's good: mainly the acting and special effects, it is a very fun and enjoyable summer blockbuster.

Plot: Iron Man 3 takes place after the events of The Avengers, which have traumatized Tony Stark (Downey Jr.). Meanwhile, mysterious, destructive, and seemingly random bombings have taken place all over the world, and a man named The Mandarin (Kingsley) takes credit for the them and threatens the world through video messages similar to the ones Osama bin Laden would put out. After Tony threatens The Mandarin, he finds himself having to fight for his life, his friends, and the world.

Things people may find “objectionable”: The main thing here, as in any superhero movie, is violence. There is a lot of people getting blown up, hurt, or killed. It's not as much gory violence like in Django Unchained, but there is fighting throughout the whole movie. There is also some mild swearing and references to sex, though it's not very pervasive.

Ratings: I'm going to try this new format for the ratings where I separate it into what I thought was good and what I thought could have been improved on. I feel it will better answer the question of "did I like the movie and why."

What was Good:

     -Acting: Definitely a strong point. I love Robert Downey Jr, and Gwyneth Paltrow, Guy Pearce, and Ben Kingsley are all great as well. Though he has a minor role, Ben Kingsley's character is worth seeing the movie for just because the scenes with him are really great. The movie has a very talented cast, and it really shows.

For lack of anything better, here's a bad Iron Man-related pun.

     -Special Effects: When watching the credits, I swear at least half of them were special effects artists of some sort. This should tell you something about where the real emphasis of the movie is. The special effects were really pretty amazing, both for Iron Man and the bad guys. My favorite special effects were used for Tony's suit that he builds that will fly to him (I don't consider this a spoiler since it's in the trailer and it's introduced within 10 minutes into the movie). It's pretty incredible how good those effects look.

     -Humor: This was one of the best parts of the movie. I loved how the movie could go from serious to funny and back again fairly easily. I love Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark. The character, because he is the giant arrogant jerk he is, is absolutely hilarious at times.
    -Adrenaline: It's an action movie, so if Iron Man 3 didn't have action and tension, it'd be failing at its job. It was exciting for a good portion of the movie, and the action scenes, as expected, keep you on the edge of your seat.

    -Directing/Cinematography: Pretty good. The visuals all looked nice and it was actually possible to tell what the hell was going on during action sequences, which for an action movie is a very good thing, since often times this is not the case.

     -Script: Pretty witty at times. Some of the lines were pretty funny. Otherwise, I didn't feel it was all that special. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't special.

     -Music/Score: Kind of a typical-sounding superhero movie score, but that's a good thing. It helps increase tension and I did like it. It wasn't an oscar-winning score, but I thought it was good.

What Could Have Been Better:

     -Story: Not a bad story, but it pretty much followed the superhero formula. Granted, the superhero formula is a winning formula, but it still wasn't ground-breakingly original. Also, there were some plot holes, concepts the movie just skimmed over, and parts of the story that were never really explored, even though they seemed important. I'd list a few of them, but I think most of them include spoilers. Still, if you just shut your mind off to this stuff, it's enjoyable.
    -Characters/Emotional Involvement: Look, do you really go to see a Marvel movie for the characters? I mean, for a superhero movie, they're not bad, but it's clear to about everyone that they are not at all the emphasis of the movie. This really doesn't detract too much from the movie though. In seeing Iron Man 3, just try and shut your mind off to these types of things and you'll enjoy it much more. Know that you're not seeing it for the characters.

     -Intelligence: Not really at thinking person's movie, but that doesn't detract from it at all. Like the characters, you should just go into the movie, shut your mind off to these details, and just go along with it and you'll enjoy it much more.

The Final Verdict: Iron Man 3, though it doesn't have the greatest writing out there, is worth seeing especially if you're a fan of other Marvel, Iron Man, or Superhero movies. It's a lot of fun to watch and is highly entertaining despite its flaws. See it if you like superhero movies, if want to see really good special effects, and if you just want to see a fun and entertaining movie.

       

Enjoying my reviews? Like my Facebook Page. And I promise I'll write more reviews soon. It's been a crazy few months and there's been nothing in the theaters.