Transformers: Dark of the Moon

My Rating: 2.5/4

I believe Micheal Bay has dished out his best attempt at making the Transformers trilogy, and in my opinion, he has not done a bad job. He made a surprisingly good first installment, the second installment got a negative fan reaction, and now Bay must take his only shot at redemption, Transformers: Dark of the Moon. In the film, Bay does many of the same things he has done right in past movies, but has lost many things that are part of the "essence" of the franchise. The plot centers around the first Apollo mission to the moon, where Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong discover a crashed Autobot spaceship, and the United States has been covering it up for the last forty years. Now, Decepticon forces are coming after a device invented by an Autobot that allows them to teleport, and Deceptions want to use it to take over the galaxy. Now, sounds like a good Transformers plot, it puts good v.s. evil, and opens many doors the clanking of robots punching each other. The writers captured that epic feel needed for large action movies, and before the film was released they stated they wanted a much darker movie this time around, and they succeeded at this. But they may have gone so dark that they have lost the playful light-hearted feel from the first film, which was a main factor in making it the most liked movie of the three for the majority of its viewers. The plot was the weakest link in "Revenge of the Fallen", and I'm afraid it has transferred over to "Dark of the Moon". Each film has centered the plot around some type of conspiracy, each putting more of an emphasis on it than the last, the first being the Hoover Dam hiding a powerful alien artifact, the second being the Pyramids hiding a powerful alien artifact, and now the government hiding the existence of an alien artifact on the moon. Transformers is supposed to be fun. The story telling of "Dark of the Moon" has become so saturated in government cover-ups that it looses a lot of the exciting and fun elements. A good script usually will make up for a bad plot, but unfortunately, "Dark of the Moon" has its share of fails in this area as well. I was especially bothered by this in the opening minutes, when we are introduced to Sam Witwicky's(Shia Lebouf) new girlfriend, Carly(Rosie-Huntington Whitley) explaining how they met, and the entire sequence is very cheesy and rushed. It moves way too fast, and just seems awkward in how the script was handled. The problem is not the actors, who are very good actors, but the problem is what they have the actors do. Some characters feel uninteresting and the audience is not really inclined to care about these characters because the writers have not deeply shown their signifigance. I do not know if there will be a Tranformers 4, but if there is, my input to them is to not put all of their focus into special effects. The effects are amazing, and one of the few things in "Dark of the Moon" I have nothing to complain about. Spend more time coming up with ideas and making the script engaging and design it to give the audience the reaction you want. There is but ONE scene in the entire film where they really capture this. There is a scene in the final face-off when Bumblebee, one of the main Autobots, is about to be executed by Decepticons, and I could honestly feel the suspense and tension of the audience rising, and when(spoiler alert!) he is saved, people started clapping. This is what those scenes should feel like all the time. Most movies are meant to give the audience a very engaging and entertaining experience, which is captured here, and the entire movie should give the mood you want it too, not just one scene. I understand a lot of time needs to be invested into the animations and special effects of the film. But if it takes a lot of time to do both the special effects and write a great script, then take your time. You will be more successful in taking a long time to make a great film than if you take an average or short amount of time to cram in a mediocre film. If you are looking for something that's not super special, and will provide you with two hours to just be entertained, then I recommend you watch "Transformers: Dark of the Moon".

Kung Fu Panda 2

My Rating: 3.5/4

After three years, Dreamworks, has released the sequel to the very popular 2008 film. It's got the same cast, consisting mainly of Jack Black, Angelina Jolie, Lucy Liu, Jackie Chan, Seth Rogen, David Cross, and Dustin Hoffman.
Fortunately, however, Kung Fu Panda 2 does NOT have the same story. Today, we see many sequels fall prey to the mistake of making the sequel follow the same plot line as it's predecessor. But for this movie, instead of just being another shallow repeat, it's rather a continuation of a grand plot line spanning the series. Or as described in the film by Master Shifu(Dustin Hoffman), "the next phase of Po's Journey". So what is this "next phase"?
Well, the movie picks up right where the original left off. (If you haven't seen the first one, stop reading) Po is now the Dragon Warrior, leading the Furious Five against evil. Now, a fierce enemy comes once again. A "Peacock Lord" named "Shen", who is coming to invade the kingdom his parents banished him from. With bladed feathers and an army of wolves at his command, he is very dangerous.
What I like is that instead of leaving the story off right there, I won't say too much, but in this film you will learn many revelations about Po, mainly centered around his parentage and origins. Things like who his parents are(which is good because I'd hate for all the small children watching this movie to be under the illusion that Ducks give birth to Pandas), where Po was born, and how he ended up at his adoptive father's house.
With this great plot line and script, the foundations are already laid, and the last frontier is pulling off the CGI animation. Which, is very impressive. The first battle sequence in the movie was very well animated and choreographed. When this is done, it is actually very fun to watch these scenes.
With a star-studded cast, I don't need to say much about the acting.
Overall, the movie is done very well, and evades many of the common mistakes in sequel plot lines, and if you liked the first one, I strongly recommend the sequel. I think Dreamworks has achieved a great success, and should put a lot more energy in this series because it may be their next "Shrek".

The Social Network

THE UNTOLD STORY OF THE MOST FAMOUS SOCIAL NETWORK IN THE WORLD. My Rating: ***** - Classic



Facebook has become known to the world. Most people use it. It was another one of those things that revolutionized technology and communication. It took its place beside Microsoft, Twitter, MySpace, and well, the Internet itself. But, have you ever wondered how they came to be? Well, "The Social Network" tells the story of Mark Zuckerberg. The CEO of Facebook and the youngest billionaire in history. After the launch in 2004, a large commotion arose at Harvard University. As friends turned to foes, and jealousy turned to court action, Mark Zuckerberg found himself in the middle of two lawsuits. One from two twins who claim he stole their idea, and one from his best friend, Eduardo Saverin. "The Social Network" does the unique thing of telling the story from all three perspectives. It does the rare thing of causing the audience to not know who the protagonists and antagonists are. It leaves that to the opinion of the audience. I am not the only critic to rave about this film. It has captured the well deserved attention of people worldwide. The script is fantastic. It has sort of modern-day Shakespeare style without the "thous", "thyns", "shalts", and "arts". It also teaches a lesson on money, considering the millions of dollars that were fought over in the film and in the real-life lawsuits. Despite how deep the film is, it also has good entertainment. For some reason, the main character is such a smart allec that it's just plain funny. You can see some examples in the trailer on Youtube. The acting is also fantastic, and is sure to skyrocket the careers of both Mark Zuckerberg and Jesse Eisenberg(the guy who plays him). There are no faults in the lines and therefore that shows up as no faults in the well written dialogue. So far, I've never heard anyone say they didn't like the movie, and I doubt that you, the reader, will say that either. In short, I loved the film so much it inspired me to make a Facebook page myself.

Starring: Jesse Eisenberg, Andrew Garfield,
Justin Timberlake Director: David Fincher

Vampires Suck

I AGREE. My Rating: ** - Fair



FINALLY! FINALLY! FINALLY someone made a movie that is a spoof of a film series that I DON'T care for. Not only that, but it was "Twilight"! My first choice. And the best part is it's so easy to make fun of. But, the film is not much different than it's cousins "Epic Movie", "Disaster Movie", "Scary Movie 1-4", "Superhero Movie", "Meet the Spartans",ect. I promise that in my lifetime you will never find a movie as light as ones like these. They are spoofs, and they have no sense. In comedy, there are different types of material. There's screwball comedy( "The Hangover"), Vulgar comedy ("Bruno"), Slapstick comedy(" Grown Ups"), and Dark comedy ("Leaves of Grass"). This film is a combo of slapstick and vulgar. Making it relatively the type of funny you'd see in "J.A." . The only bad thing about this film is that you probably won't laugh that much if you are A. Clueless as to what "Twilight" is, B. old, or C. mature. And the plot is derived from the first twilight movie but also borrows from "The Twilight Saga: New Moon". So, almost any major part in the two films you may remember will be disassembled and changed into a spoof. As for acting, well, in these kinds of movies you don't especially need to act. Just go out there and act crazy. I was really laughing a few times, nut I can only give it two stars because it was so stupid. If you want anything with a remote bit of seriousness, DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE! If you don't mind this sort of thing, go ahead. But if you do watch it on DVD, you probably will be out of options at blockbuster.

Starring: Jen Proske, Matt Lanter Directors: Aaron Seltzer, Jason Freidberg

Takers

EVERYONE'S AFTER SOMETHING. My Rating: ***1/2 - Good

Mansions, clubs, and pretty much all-out lives of luxury are in possession of a group of takers. Physically fit, smart, highly trained bank robbers. Played by a cast consisting of Idris Elba("The Losers"), Hayden Christiansen (Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith), and many other stars. Although, I could feel a rise of resentment in the theatre wen Chris Brown came on screen. But, I think they still enjoyed it. Anyways, the Takers have been pulling off bank jobs for a few years, and now, after finishing their latest one, an old friend is released after doing five years and prison. He is nicknamed "Ghost", and played by the famous rapper T.I. ... and he's got plans of his own that will decide the fate of the Takers and two cops( Matt Dillon and Jay Hernandez) who are investigating their bank robberies. In many ways, this film reminds me of movies like "The Bank Job"(starring Jason Statham) and "The Town"(Starring Ben Affleck). Both of which are movies about bank robberies. But the main thing they have in common, is that they all end the same way. It seems to be a common trait among robbery movies. Of course, I won't tell you the ending because that would make me a VERY irresponsible critic. The audience that would like this kind of movie is a person who likes films with a lot of tension and drama. Because when cops and robbers are involved, it's hard to lose your attention. Yet, it is also not as heavy or inappropriate as most movies of its kind. So it's a little easier to so younger audiences why you shouldn't be robbing banks. The acting is good, nothing spectacular. It was what it is: enough to keep your attention. If I had to put the film in a nutshell, I'd say its a light, short, entertaining bank robbery movie. But in the end, most people probably won't have that much to say about it.

Starring: Idris Elba, Hayden Christiansen, Director: John Lussenhop
Matt Dillon, Chris Brown, Paul Walker, T.I.

Scott Pilgrim V.S. the World

My Rating: 3.5/4


Some movies in film history have been unexpected gifts. Some films looked like they were either made by a psycho or were going to be duds. "Scott Pilgrim V.S. the World", at first glance of the previews, looked to be both. But, after watching the film, I was proven wrong. Now, "Scott Pilgrim V.S. the World"? What is that? Just hearing the name of the title makes you curious as to what it's about. Well, the plot goes like this: Scott Pilgrim(Micheal Cera...above, last on left) lives in the odd land of Toronto. Heart broken from several recent break-ups. One day, He gets a glimpse of a new girl who's moved there, Ramona Flowers(Mary Winstead... above, second from the very left),. One look and he's instantly into a trance. And is seemingly later obsessed. After much drooling over the thought of her, he gets a date and later finds out her big piece of baggage. He, in comic book-ey, special effects fireworks, cheesy videogame-like battles, must defeat her seven evil exes. Well, nothing is free right? Her exes consist of a weirdo who wears dark make-up, a cocky movie star, a vegan superman, a (well, I'll let you see the film for this one), two twin Japenese electric piano-whiz kids, and a snotty rich guy. With big challenges ahead of Scott, it's a shocker, but if he wants Ramona, he's going to have to fight for her. Now, I understand how weird that sounds. And I presume you now know what I was saying earlier about the previews. You may think it's dumb and weird, but it, like I said, is one of those unexpected gifts. "Scott Pilgrim V.S. the World" (out of what I've seen) is probably Micheal Cera's best film. As for other critics, this one ranks just behind the likes of "Superbad" and "Juno". I loved how the film didn't copy off of any known plot, but was made by total imagination. It's probably the most original film since "Inception", another great movie. This film was a bold attempt to try something new. And folks, this is what keeps the movie industry fresh. New Ideas + hard work = New Movies + very well done = NEW PHENOMENON! While I don't known about Scott Pilgrim becoming a "Phenomenon", considering it ranked # 10 at the box office in it's opening weekend, and now ranks outside the top 10(which is pretty bad for a major movie release), I still think that if it had more attention, more people would rave about it. It is actually a very interesting movie, and it keeps the unique quality of a happy/sad mood at the same time. The acting is so well done that the main characters you meet are instantly very like able. Especially Ramona....anyway, the acting gets the job done and doesn't allow any lack of talent to tear at the film's core. Which the perfectly chosen cast is responsible for. I also like how they took such an oddball plot and turned it into "Hall of Fame" material. Now what makes it hall of fame material? I already mentioned the great acting and original ideas, but the film's script and sequencing is what people like most in movies. And that's what I loved about "Scott Pilgrim V.S. the World". The script is very well done, while lines may be funny, surprising, serious, or are perfect matches for the sequencing, they all contribute to the film's wellness. Avoiding the diseases that plague so many films. And almost all of the things in "Scott Pilgrim V.S. the World" are part of the cure. It was such a fun and enjoyable movie, you can't help but like it. It seems to remain in that tricky middleground of being morally deep and symbolic all the way to being a light viewing sitcom type - ordeal. Although it does use creative yet video- game like special effects(which was what they were supposed to be like, it even does the Universal pictures theme song in a digital remix type way at the beginning), it does maintain that love-story sense of realism. Whether you think the film looks interesting or like a piece of weirdo junk, I recommend "Scott Pilgrim V.S. the World" to everyone. This is a textbook example that shows you how blessings come from the most unexpected places. And I'm proud to say that this was the movie I reviewed for my 50th movie review. I don't know about you, but I'm defintely looking forward to this one on DVD.
Starring: Micheal Cera, Mary Elizabeth Winstead Director: Edgar Wright

Diary of a Wimpy Kid

My Rating: 2/4


Jeff Kinney, the author of the "Diary of a Wimpy Kid" series, has claimed seemingly more attention and praise nowadays than that of J.K. Rowling's "Harry Potter" series which has become a world-wide phenomenon and it looks as if the "Diary of a Wimpy Kid" series is on its way. In order to jump-start this rise of attention, 20th Century Fox has released the feature film of the first book. It's about a kid named Greg Heffley(Zachary Gordon) who's mom(Rachael Harris) buys him a blank book with "Diary" on the cover. He claims it's a "journal", but I'll leave it up to you and what you think it is. The entries in his journal are all about his experiences in middle school, which he is just starting as the film picks up. During this time, he must juggle class, his parents, his gross baby brother Manny(Connor Feilding), his psycho and mean older brother Rodrick(Devon Bostick), his estranged friend Rowley(Robert Capron), and many other odd characters throughout middle school as he goes through one "sucks to be him" experience after another. Which(I am being sarcastic) serves as great encouragement for yours truly who just started the 7th grade as well. Another character I must mention is a friend he makes at school, Angie Steadman, played by Chloe Moretz who, when she isn't covered in victim's blood,(I'm referring to "Kick A**" by the way) actually is kinda...well...you get the point. While I was curious to see how the film would compare to the book, I wasn't very impressed. The acting from the main cast was average, nothing too exciting, the script was a little cheesy and childish, as was the film in general. I was glad that the film did avoid on major problem. Most books or series that are made into movies edit out a lot of the book. Even if it's important. This problem arose in things like "Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Theif""(of which I read the entire series), "Eragon", "Harry Potter"(but then again those movies had the potential to be four hours long if they had not edited anything), and countless others. In fact, to avoid this problem, the makers of the "Harry Potter" Series are presenting the 7th and final installment, "Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows" in two parts(part one: Nov 19, 2010, part two: July 2011). Luckily, the "Diary of a Wimpy Kid" books were so short (only about 200 pages each), I can't even really think of anything that wasn't in the film. It included pretty much every event I can think of. But, that can't completely save the movie. While I wasn't exactly excited while watching it, it did at least keep my attention. But, for an older audience, you may wander off to other things. It doesn't exactly hit every type of audience, you may love it or you may hate it. The acting isn't great, the script isn't great, it's cheesy and childish, but some adults have enjoyed it so I can't really judge the film and say that's how much you would like it, I can only tell you how much I liked it. But regardless, if you plan on watching the film and are maybe in high school/ college or just finishing them, "Proceed With Caution".

Starring: Zachary Gordon, Robert Capron, Director: Thor Freudenthal
Chloe Moretz, Rachael Harris, Devon Bostick,
Steve Zahn