American Hustle (2013) Review

AMERICAN HUSTLE (2013)
Director: David O. Russell

Writers: Eric Singer and David O. Russell

Producers: Bradley Cooper, Eric Singer, George Parra, and Matthew Budman

Editors: Alan Baumgarten, Jay Cassidy, and Crispin Struthers

Cinematography: Linus Sandgren

Music: Danny Elfman

Starring: Christian Bale, Amy Adams, Bradley Cooper, Jeremy Renner, and Jennifer Lawrence

Runtime: 2 hours 18 minutes

Rating: R (language, sexual content, brief violence)

Genre: Crime, Drama

Release Date: December 20, 2013

Intro: It's Oscar season, one of the best seasons of the year behind baseball season. It's great because during this season, there are always movies premiering that will most likely receive Oscar nominations, which means there is often a plethora of good movies out to see. American Hustle is one of this year's batch, and after it got rave reviews, I got interested. American Hustle is a fun and enjoyable crime movie on the outside, but it's the supreme acting, subtle but great directing, the engaging script, and the interesting incorporation of the soundtrack on the inside that elevate the movie to an Oscar-worthy level.

Plot: Conman Irving Rosenfeld (Bale) and his British partner-in-crime and mistress Sydney Prosser (Adams) are forced to work with an FBI Agent (Cooper) to pull off a sting operation by using good guy New Jersey politician Carmine Polito (Renner). It's based off the Abscam scandal in the 70s.

Things People May Find Objectionable: There's a lot of swearing in the form of f-bombs and a LOT of cleavage shots, especially with Amy Adams, which they push quite a bit. I'll let you decide whether this is a good or a bad thing. I'm just letting you know it's there. Also, there's really only one violent scene, and it it's over quickly and isn't that gory.

What was Good:

     -Acting: This is perhaps the best part of the movie and what makes it work so well. It features fantastic performances from whole cast, as everybody disappears into their roles. Often times, subtlety makes the performance, especially for Amy Adams, as she excels in her role, but does it less obviously than some of her cast members. Christian Bale gives the best performance in my opinion. He is absolutely dead-on with his role, as he portrays his character perfectly. Jeremy Renner, Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence are also great. I really can't talk enough about the acting here. It was superb. Without a doubt in my mind, at least one of the cast members is going to win an Oscar for their role in this movie.

     -Directing/Cinematography: Fantastic. It's not as grandiose, obvious, or flashy as some other directing, but it's very subtle and does a great job of showing the emotions and tension behind the characters. Showing the feelings of the characters and highlighting the acting is where it succeeds the most, in my opinion. It makes me want to see more of David O. Russell's movies.

     -Music/Score: Mostly 70s music was used for the soundtrack, and it really fit the movie well. They use some great stuff including Steely Dan, Elton John, Chicago, and Paul McCartney. Not only did the music give a sense of the era, but the soundtrack was incorporated into the action. The best instance of this is during a tense scene where the fates of the characters are uncertain. "Live and Let Die" plays and the action on screen is edited based off the lyrics and rhythm of the song. It's really cool to see a soundtrack incorporated so well into a movie, and it perfectly elevates the tension. 

Christian Bale's character was based off real life conman
Mel Weinberg who worked with the FBI

     -Script: The script was good. I thought it was very well-written. The dialogue definitely keeps the movie going. The voiceovers were really interesting, as they shift to different characters at points. It's kind of reminiscent of the same technique used in Goodfellas, where Henry's wife is characterized through her voiceover, as it tells how she felt about Henry and why she was attracted to him. I think this is a great way to establish characters and their relationships with one another.

     -Humor: The movie is very funny at times. There are some good comedic moments. You will laugh. Jennifer Lawrence and Christian Bale are especially funny, as they both absolutely nail their slightly insane characters. The movie almost floats into the comedy genre, though I'd hesitate to call it a conventional one.

     -Characters/Emotional Involvement: Pretty good. While you may not feel emotionally connected to every character in every situation, you do end up caring for them at the end. The characters are definitely not flat either. For most of the movie, the main characters are fleshed out and you understand their motives and positions, and sometimes you understand just how stuck the characters are in their situation and sympathize with them because of it.

Worth Noting:
     -Story: The story gets a little confusing at times and you can get a little lost, but in the end it all makes sense. Just go along with it, and you'll be able to understand everything at the end, even if it isn't immediately clear. Otherwise, the story is good and definitely interesting. It keeps you hooked, that's for sure. To be honest, I hadn't heard of Abscam before watching the movie, but now I understand how interesting the source material is. I'm glad somebody made a movie based off that story.

     -Intelligence: This is definitely a smart movie that requires you to think somewhat. Morality here is ambiguous and left up to interpretation. The movie also sticks with you, to be sure. It's not one you can go see and then forget about a couple hours later.

The Verdict: American Hustle is one of those movies that is as entertaining as it is well-made. The acting is phenomenal, the directing is subtle, but fantastic, and the script is entertaining and well-written. I would imagine the movie will be up for numerous Oscars this year, and I'm pretty sure it will win at least a couple. I'd highly recommend seeing this one. You get two for the price of one: an entertaining movie and a well-made piece of cinema. If you want a quality movie to see this Oscar season, I highly suggest checking out American Hustle.

Liking my reviews? Like my Facebook page. 

Thor: The Dark World (2013)

THOR: THE DARK WORLD (2013)

Director: Alan Taylor

Writers: Christopher Yost, Christopher Markus, Stephen McFeely, Don Payne, and Robert Rodat

Producers: Victoria Alonso, Louis D'Esposito, Alan Fine, Nigel Gostelow, Craig Kyle, and Stan Lee

Editors: Dan Lebental and Wyatt Smith

Cinematography: Kramer Morgenthau

Music: Brian Tyler

Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, and Christopher Eccleston

Runtime: 1 hour 52 minutes

Rating: PG-13 (intense sci-fi action & violence, some suggestive content)

Genre: Superhero, Action, Fantasy

Release Date: November 8, 2013

Before Watching the Movie: It's really not necessary to see Thor or even The Avengers before watching the movie. Everything is fairly easy to pick up.

Intro: Sorry for not posting more often. I'm in my first quarter of college and it's been a little crazy adjusting to things. Anyway, it's easy to convince me to watch Marvel movies. Though they are not the pinnacle of filmmaking excellence, I always find them entertaining and fun. This one was no different. Thor: The Dark World does exactly what it is intended to do: thrill and entertain as a superhero movie. While it isn't perfect, it is saved by Loki, its humor, action, and visuals.

Plot: Years ago, the Dark Elves sought to bring darkness to the universe, but Asgard and other worlds stopped them before they could dominate. 5,000 years later, after they are all presumed dead, the Elves begin to resurrect under their leader Malekith. When Earth, Asgard, and 7 other worlds in the universe are threatened by the elves, it is up to Thor (Hemsworth), his earth girlfriend Jane (Portman) and his evil brother Loki (Hiddleston) to save everyone.

Things People May Find Objectionable: There's a lot of violence and a couple of mild swear words, but that's pretty much it. It has the same level of content as any other superhero movie.

What was Good:

     -Directing/Cinematography: The movie looks good. There's no denying that. It's a really good piece of eye candy. I was pretty impressed with the directing too. You can actually tell what is going on with the action sequences, which is always a plus with action movies.

     -Action/Suspense: Plenty of action to go around. This is another thing Marvel never disappoints with. It's definitely an exciting movie.

     -Humor: The movie had some seriously funny moments in it! The wittiness was one of the things that made it so enjoyable. It seems like Marvel movies are getting progressively funnier. This is a good thing, in my opinion. The funnier a movie is, the more enjoyable it is.

The poster looks good, but it's almost exactly the same as the Iron Man 3
poster. Lack of creativity, eh Marvel?

     -Loki: Tom Hiddleston as Loki pretty much steals the show. He is in all the memorable scenes of the movie and provides great comic relief, but is also very good in the dramatic scenes. Pretty much any scene with him is better than all of the scenes without him. Not that those other scenes are bad, it's just Loki makes them better. I would love to see a Loki-centric movie. I think it would work really well.

     -Special Effects: Really great. Marvel never disappoints with the visuals. It's hard to distinguish between actual sets and the CGI, aside from the whole alien world thing. It was really convincing. It's a testament to how good CGI has become these days.

What Could Have Been Better:

     -Script: Not a great script, but it was ok. The comedic parts were really well-written, but sometimes the dramatic lines seemed a little weak and cliché. It doesn't ruin the movie by any measure, but it feels like the script could've been stronger. You'd think they could do that between 5 screenwriters.

      -Characters: Except for Loki and somewhat Thor, the characters were al relatively flat. The side characters were just that: on the side. Not much attention was paid to their characters.

      -Pacing: The movie moves very quickly. Hardly ever is there a dull moment, but sometimes it seems if as the movie moves a little too fast. It felt like they kind of glazed over some storylines in favor of moving the plot along. My question to the filmmakers is, why include some storylines at all if you're just going to skim over them? I felt like the movie might have functioned better if there wasn't so much involvement with Earth. I think it would've functioned just fine as solely a space opera.

Worth Noting:

     -Story: Look, it's formula, same as pretty much all superhero movies and definitely all Marvel movies. You're not going to get anything groundbreaking story-wise. As far as the way it's told, there's not too many obvious plot holes, though some things are not as well-explained as they should have been. Sometimes you'll get a "wait, what?" moment, but it doesn't make the story hard to understand. It's just some small details that go unexplained.

The Verdict: Thor: The Dark World is a perfectly good and entertaining superhero movie, but not a lot more. It has great visuals, a lot of action, and a surprisingly good performance by Tom Hiddleston, but has cliché writing and weird pacing. I'd almost be willing to say it was as good if not better than Iron Man 3. Anyway, I would recommend this one for a fun and entertaining movie. If you like Marvel's other stuff, you should like this one.

Liking my reviews? Like my Facebook page.

The World's End (2013) Review

THE WORLD'S END (2013)
Director: Edgar Wright

Writers: Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright

Producers: James Biddle, Liza Chasin, Eric Fellner, Nira Park, and Tim Bevan

Editor: Paul Machliss

Cinematography: Bill Pope

Music: Steven Price

Starring: Simon Pegg, Nick Frost, Paddy Considine, Eddie Marsan, and Martin Freeman

Best Credit: Mark Donovan and Ricky Champ as "Big Ugly Bastards"

Runtime: 1 hour 49 minutes

Rating: R (pervasive language and sexual references)

Genre: Comedy, Action, Sci-Fi

Release Date: August 23, 2013

Intro: I've been disappointed a lot with movies this summer. Maybe I'm just getting tired of the same old summer blockbuster formulas and overdone CGI, but it has seemed like a lot of this summer's movies are kind of the same. So when I saw a British comedy getting 90% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, I knew this is one I wanted to see, especially since I've heard good things about Simon Pegg and Nick Frost's stuff. I wasn't disappointed. The World's End kind of has it all. First and foremost, it's funny, but it is also very well-written, acted, and directed and makes for a really good and entertaining movie.

Plot: Back in 1990, a group of high school friends led by Gary King (Pegg) attempted the "golden mile" in their hometown of Newton-Haven, in which they would drink at 12 different bars, the last of which is the World's End. They didn't quite make it, so 23 years later, Gary wants to try again. He approaches his reluctant companions from that night and gets them to come back to Newton-Haven. However, they soon realize that a lot of things aren't quite right with the town.

Things People May Find Objectionable: The biggest thing here is swearing. There is quite a bit of language. Otherwise, there's some violence and gore, but I've seen worse in PG-13 movies. If you take out the language, this one would've easily been rated PG-13 instead of R.

What was Good:

     -Humor: Definitely a strong point of the movie. It isn't hilarious right off the bat, but once it gets going, it's really funny. In a day and age where not many quality comedies are produced, The World's End is really refreshing with its smart humor. I think it's fairly safe to say that it's the summer's funniest movie. The nice thing is that for the most part, the movie doesn't rely on cheap pop culture references for laughs, so it will probably be able to retain its humor longer than your average comedy.

     -Story: I thought the story was very well-written and pretty well-thought-out. What impressed me the most is how seamlessly they were able to blend genres. Also, the attention to detail is very nice, as a lot of stuff comes back later in the movie or makes more sense after seeing the plot unfold. I thought the ending probably could've been a little better, but overall the story was very interesting and well-told. 

     -Directing/Cinematography: I really liked the directing in this one. The shots were interesting and the movie was very visual. It's cool to see a well-directed comedy. That doesn't seem to happen all that often, as it seems a lot of the best directors opt to work on dramas or action movies instead. 

     -Script: Wow! An actually well-written summer movie! Who'da thought? Sadly, it seems like a rarity nowadays, so it makes me even more impressed when I see good writing in a movie. The attention to detail is great and the script and story are both very smart.

Simon Pegg's stuck-in-the-90's character, Gary King, holding
a map of the "Golden Mile" the characters attempt

     -Acting: The acting is one of the main reasons the movie worked as well as it did. Simon Pegg and Nick Frost are both great, and their supporting cast of Martin Freeman, Paddy Considine, and Eddie Marsan are really good at backing them up. As one of my friends mentioned, the line delivery is part of the reason some of the lines were so funny, which says a lot about the actors.

     -Special Effects: This isn't a movie you'd expect to have first rate special effects, but they are actually pretty good. They are used relatively sparingly, they look pretty convincing, and above all they work.

Worth Noting:
     -Characters/Emotional Involvement: This was good for both Simon Pegg and Nick Frost's characters, as the characters are refreshingly well-developed. However, the other characters seem a little thin and somewhat forgotten by the screenwriters at times. It works, but sometimes you wonder what happened to a certain character and start wondering if anyone cares about them anymore.

     -Action/Suspense: The movie actually has a nice action side to it, even though it's not as wall-to-wall with its action as something like Iron Man 3. It's exciting, but the focus is the humor.

     -Originality: The movie was very original in that it essentially blended 3 genres. It took a typical sci-fi plot, a typical action plot, and a typical buddy comedy plot and mashed them together. This kind of blending is hard to pull off, but the filmmakers do it very, very well.

     -Intelligence: Unlike a lot of summer movies, especially comedies, the movie is very smart. The writers know what they're doing and have obviously thought a lot of the plot and the jokes through. It's really nice to see this for once. 

The Verdict: The World's End is either the best or tied for the best (with Star Trek: Into Darkness) movie I've seen this summer. It has just about everything. It's funny and it also has good acting, directing, writing, and a healthy dose of action and character development. I would definitely recommend seeing this one. Though it takes a little bit to get going, once it does, it's a really fun, funny, and enjoyable movie.

Liking my reviews? Like my Facebook page.

Kick-Ass 2 (2013) Review

KICK-ASS 2
Director: Jeff Wadlow

Writer: Jeff Wadlow

Producers: Trevor Duke-Moretz, Pierre Lagrange, Mark Millar, Stephen Marks, John Romita, Claudia Schiffer, Brad Pitt, and Matthew Vaughn

Editor: Eddie Hamilton

Cinematography: Tim Maurice-Jones

Music: Henry Jackman and Matthew Margeson

Starring: Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Chloe Grace Moretz, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Lindy Booth, Olga Kurkulina and Jim Carrey

Best Credit: Cinna as "Eisenhower." Cinna is a dog.

Runtime: 1 hour 43 minutes

Rating: R (strong violence, pervasive language, sex content, brief nudity)

Genre: Action, Crime, Superhero, Comedy

Release Date: August 16, 2013

Before Watching the Movie: You should probably see the first Kick-Ass movie before watching this one, as a lot of references are made to things that happen in it. If you don't have time, it would be a good idea to read a spoiler-filled synopsis of the first one.

Intro: So I start college in about a month. While I have a long summer, I have to contend with having a lot of friends leave and fewer people to hang out. So I got excited when the people who are actually still here want to hang out. So we decided to see a movie. I was kind of hoping to see either Elysium or The World's End, but since we'd seen Kick-Ass 1 at a recent movie night, my friends chose to see this. I enjoyed the first one, so I went in went in with an open mind. Kick-Ass 2 proves that lightning can't strike twice, as it fails to deliver in the same areas its predecessor is able to pull off, as it has excessive violence and backstories and character development that seem unnecessary.

Plot: After the events of the first Kick-Ass movie, Kick-Ass/Dave (Taylor-Johnson) has started a movement for everyday citizens to become masked vigilantes. His counterpart, Hit-Girl/Mindy (Moretz) has begun high school and is having problems fitting in. Meanwhile, grieving millionaire and former sidekick of Kick-Ass, Red Mist (Mintz-Plasse), has decided to avenge his father and become the world's first supervillain.

Things People May Find Objectionable: Oh God, where to begin. There's really a bit of everything in this one: craptons of swearing, craptons of violence and gore, and one scene with brief nudity. This is definitely not one to take kids to. If you're uncomfortable with violence and swearing, don't see this one.

What was Good:

     -Humor: The movie was at least good in this department. The first part of the movie is pretty funny and there are some really funny moments. However, as the movie becomes more dark and serious, it begins to fail and becomes a lot less fun to watch. The movie probably would've functioned best as purely a comedy. I felt this way when watching Kick-Ass 1 as well, but it was actually able to pull it off.

     -Acting: I gotta say, the acting was pretty good. I usually have a bias against child actors in their performances, but Chloe Grace Moretz is really pretty good as Hit-Girl/Mindy. The other actors do a good job as well. I mean, no Oscar performances here, but the acting is solid.

     -Directing/Cinematography: It was alright, I guess. I really liked the choices of color for all the characters and sets. It kept it very interesting. Also, the action sequences weren't all that bad, as you can tell what's going on for the most part. It wasn't Kubrick or Hitchcock-level directing by any measure, but it wasn't bad.

What Could Have Been Better:

     -Pacing: The movie gets off to a good start, but from the middle to the end, it drags quite a bit. It felt much longer than it actually was while watching it. I was surprised looking on IMDb and seeing how short it actually was. I could've sworn this thing was 2 and a half hours even though it was just under 2. 

Something the filmmakers should really learn

     -Violence: Any movie with this amount of violence walks the line between something insanely fun and watchable like the stuff Quentin Tarantino is famous for and something that just seems like it has excessive and unnecessary amounts of it and becomes old. While it's predecessor managed to walk the line fairly well, Kick-Ass 2 falls on the other side. While some violence was fine, it seemed like the movie just had an excessive and gratuitous amount. After a while, it got to the point where it got old and I got tired of watching it.

     -Story: I really liked the basic premise of the movie and its predecessor. It's a great, refreshing take on the superhero genre. If they had stuck with just the whole average guy becoming a superhero part of the story, I think the story would've been better. At times, I kept thinking, "Did you guys really have to go there?" or "Did we really have to see that?" or "Is this really necessary?" A lot of the plot, especially the emotional, character moments seemed unnecessary. I mean, they fit the plot ok, it just seems like they could've told the same story without them.

     -Characters/Emotional Involvement: I got really tired of the movie's attempts at this, really fast. The character development and emotional parts of the movie really dragged on, and a lot of it I felt was unnecessary to the story. I'm not sure if I cared about the characters or not, but I got tired of the attempts to develop them.

     -Script: Like pretty much the whole movie, the script started out ok and then went downhill when things begin to get serious. The only bits of good writing were in the opening like 20 minutes when the movie was still trying to do comedy.

The Verdict: Though it is entertaining at times, especially with its humor, Kick-Ass 2 fails to pull off what Kick-Ass 1 was able to. A movie should be fun to watch unless it's trying to make a statement by being hard to watch. The movie really isn't that fun to watch, nor does it make any profound statements. This movie doesn't have enough redeeming qualities to make me recommend it. If you're interested in movies like Kick-Ass 2, I recommend watching Kick-Ass 1 or something by Tarantino instead.

Liking my reviews? Like my Facebook page.