V/H/S

Happy 2013 everybody! I have no idea where 2012 went, but I'm excited for the new year. I was browsing Netflix a couple weeks ago, and I found out V/H/S had been added. I was so happy. I heard about the movie fall of 2012, and that it was rapidly gaining indie awards and a large fan base. So I had to see if it lived up to all of the hype. It doesn't.

The plot is a group of petty criminals are hired by an unknown man to steal a series of VHS tapes. They discover the owner of the tapes is dead, and they decide to to see what's so important about the tapes. Based on that general description, I was intrigued. Then...you actually watch the movie. The criminals are what I consider to be the worst examples of human beings on this planet. They destroy homes, sexually assault women, steal anything that isn't nailed down and say a vulgar word that rhymes with duck every 30 seconds. We have to sit and watch these idiots for 15 minutes. The full run time is 2 hours. And yes, it does feel that long.

The moron squad finally gets to the house, and discover the owner dead and slumped over in a chair. Naturally instead of getting the tapes and getting out the creepy house, they have the "brilliant" idea of staying there to ransack the house and view the tapes. Keep in mind the entire film is in that "found footage" style that I really cannot stand. However, I tried to put that aside and give all the shenanigans a fighting chance. My first impression would prove to be right. I'm not going to say that type of style is bad, but I haven't come across a film that uses it effectively. That's what ultimately drags the movie down. It gives a sense of realism, but you're also quite lost when it becomes too dark or shaky to determine what's going on.

The tapes themselves are 6 random stories that don't really have a beginning or an ending. All of them start with very unlikable people that die after about 15 minutes. That's all V/H/S is: a poor man's Creepshow. To it's credit, the stories are creative and sometimes downright creepy. Any actually scariness is lost because it looks like the film is having a seizure when the monster or murderer is revealed.

It reminds me of the one Spongebob Squarepants episode where he has bad breath, and Patrick tries to comfort him by telling him the tale of the ugly barnacle.



That's V/H/S in a nutshell: everyone dies, there's no point, the end. For awesome effects and gore, originality and a couple creepy moments I give it 2/5. I say watch it once just to see something a little bit different, but don't expect it to live up to the hype.

Best of 2012

Yeah, I'm like every other movie reviewer on the planet. So what? I'm funny and I say more than "it sucks don't see it". 2012 was definitely a surprise. There were so many movies that I was excited to see that were a complete disappointment, but there were quite a few that were true masterpieces. A couple of you might ask me why I'm not doing the worst movies first. It's because that is a much longer list, and I believe ending the year on a more realistic note. Without further ado, let's get into the best of 2012.

5. Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

I feel like the only person on this earth that liked this movie, but screw you it's my list. When I see a movie, I'm not looking for Oscar material (although number 1 definitely is). I want to be entertained. I want to laugh. I want to care about the characters and whether they live or die. I felt that way watching this. It's great action, it's funny and it's just something different. I'm all for something that's different and not most of the 2 hour time wasters that are being churned out at a rapid rate (I'm looking at you, Prometheus).

4. The Watch

It's Superbad level of raunchy comedy with aliens. How could you not think that's hilarious?

3. The Expendables 2

A true action flick with so much action it will make your testicles explode. It's gory and violent and Stallone is pretty hot. Do not judge me. I think Van Damme hasn't been speaking English for a few years because his accent is very thick. It works, but it makes anything he says unintentionally funny. That aside, this is the only good action flick of 2012.

2. The Avengers

You knew this was going to make the list. What else can I say about it? It's pretty much the perfect movie. As much as I love this one, there's one that beat it by a hair. So what is it? What do I consider to be the best of the best? Well...

The number 1 movie of 2012 is:

It's a horror movie, and the ONLY good horror movie of 2012. God bless you, Joss Whedon. This came out of freaking nowhere, and I love it. They managed to keep this movie so under wraps that the trailers barely gave anything away. I was actually stunned. It's a great script, the cast is incredible and best of all it restored my faith in film making. It's a break from the norm that us horror fans needed. So thank you Joss for making sure 2012 didn't completely suck.

Honorable Mentions (The "Meh" Pack):

The Dark Knight Rises

I wanted to like this one so badly. I just can't. It's not bad at all. But it is way too long, and I couldn't help but feel like I was watching 2-3 movies all stuffed into 3 hours. Bane is the most terrifying villain I've ever seen, but I wish they had done something different with his voice. It just sounded too cartoon-like to me. If they had spent a little more time on it, it would have been a better movie, and it would have made this list.

Looper

I'm very on the fence about this one. It starts off great, then it kind of takes a hard left. Then there are all these glaring plot holes. Even if you don't quite the whole concept of time travel, you just know the events laid out in the movie don't make any kind of sense. So you end up sitting there trying to figure out what the hell they're talking about. It's distracting, and it makes your head hurt. It's a great script in theory and the cast is spectacular, but what they came up with just wasn't quite all there.

 

ParaNorman

I know what you're thinking. It's a kid's movie with zombies, so based on my other reviews I should love it, right? Not quite. It's not horrible, but I felt like it was borderline adult in subject matter. There were so many jokes and concepts that the average kid that sees this just won't get. It kind of takes away from the fun of it all. Also, it's pretty damn terrifying for a kid's movie.

Wreck-It Ralph

Oh I am not going to gain any new fans for this one. It just wasn't that great to me. I mean it's semi entertaining, and there's a great twist at the end. But the moments in between are just too long and pointless to me. Maybe it's because I'm not a huge video game fan. It's just the definition of "meh" to me.

There you have it. That's my list. Love it? Hate it? Did I miss a movie or two? Let me know in the comments. In the meantime, stay tuned for the worst of 2012. That's...going to hurt me and you.

Magic Mike

WARNING:

In case you've been living under a rock for the last few months or just don't pay attention, this is a movie about male strippers. Therefore I do not want to hear any complaints about my opinions/preferences on the subject matter. 

Yes, I paid money to see a movie about male strippers. On the other hand, Channing Tatum is one of the sexiest actors around. I did not want to see this for the story. At the same time,  I never thought a movie about male strippers could be so underwhelming. The first 20-30 minutes are great. There's just hot half naked men dancing and doing things that I'm pretty sure only happen in Tampa. Then...everything falls apart.

We're subjected to about 6 different plot points. None of them are really resolved. They pop up, screw up someone's life, and all is forgotten. And we quickly discover that most of the stuff going on has nothing to do with Mike. It's all about his new protege Adam, who is the biggest ass monkey I've seen on screen all year. His sister doesn't want him stripping, but then quickly forgets about it and doesn't bring it up anymore. Conflict resolution in this film is basically not bringing it up ever again.

And then there's the acting. Dear god, the acting. I've come to terms with the fact that Tatum is nothing more than a great face and amazing body. Everyone else? I think they all reached enlightenment for terrible acting. The "love interest" first comes off as cold, then uptight and finally a judgmental bitch. Matthew McConaughey must've smoked copious amounts of weed in between takes because he just sounds high all the damn time. I was also forced to watch his wrinkly butt flop around on a stage half naked. And Olivia Munn quit what was probably the best video game gig in the world just to play the two-timing slut.

So the story is pretty much non-existent, and the acting is abysmal. There has to be long scenes of the guys being stupid hot for no reason, right? No, because then I wouldn't be complaining that much. All of the raw sexual energy is quickly expelled during the first half hour. That was probably the best half hour of my life. However, if the entire premise is based on male strippers in Florida, every other scene better be Tatum dry humping, booty popping or pelvic thrusting. I don't care if that sounds disgusting. I hate false advertising, especially when it comes to anything sexual.

To recap we have bad acting, no concrete plot, a two hour running time with only 30 minutes of stripping. I give it 2/5. Why does it get 2/5? I saw Channing Tatum naked. I consider that to be the only redeeming factor out of this whole thing. I would recommend something else, but is there a movie about stripping that isn't porn? Yeah, I didn't think so either.

Memory Lane Special: Antichrist

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Ted

It's a freaking teddy bear that smokes pot, has sex and cusses like a sailor. What more do I need to say? Think of this as an unrated Family Guy minus the Meg abuse. But it actually works. Seth MacFarlane just has a knack for being the most outrageous and vulgar characters, but this one actually sticks out. It's just a movie about a guy growing up with a talking teddy bear, and finally learning to be on his own. Thankfully it's not as mushy as it sounds.

This is not a film for people that don't like crude humor. It can be borderline offensive, but that's what makes it hilarious. Mark Wahlberg is great as John. You can tell he knew the premise was pretty ridiculous and he just ran with it. Mila Kunis was a bit weaker as Lori. She's kind of the Kristen Stewart of the whole movie. She just doesn't really emote, and her delivery falls flat. All of the supporting cast is great though, and there are quite a few cameos from Family Guy cast members. Also, there's this super creeper played by Giovanni Ribisi. He's obsessed with Ted, and wants to steal him to give him to his very pudgy son, Robert. The only thing I wished for was more of his back story. A character that creepy is bound to have numerous issues.

All in all, I thought this was one of the funniest movies I've seen in my life. Given the plot, I wasn't expecting much except for a few cheap laughs. I was surprised at just how funny it is. The only downside is the editing. It's very choppy, and there are no seamless transitions between scenes. Other than having one of the worst editors in the world, it's perfect if you just want a good laugh. I give it a 4/5. It's a great comedy, but stay away if you're easily offended.

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

Let's get one important fact out of the way: this was never meant to be a comedy. I normally don't factor other reviews into my own, but it's becoming so annoying that I have to bring it up. It's not based on humor. Lincoln's mother is killed by a vampire, and he devotes most of his adult life becoming stronger to avenge her death. What part of that could possibly be considered funny? Now that my first rant in almost 3 weeks is over, let's get into the actual movie.

I'll admit that I thought this was going to be bad. I figured it'd be great for gore and action. Once again, I was wrong. Seth Grahame-Smith is a very strong screenwriter, and Timur Bekmambetov proves that he deserves to be known for something other than Wanted. Benjamin Walker did a solid job of portraying Lincoln. Then again, I wasn't exactly looking for complete historical accuracy, and I also don't really care. The rest of the cast were  very good. The main complaint I have are the villains: first vampire Adam and his enforcer/sister Vadoma. The one thing about this film is that when the action gets started, it comes at you hard and fast. It's very intense. Rufus Sewell and Erin Wasson just don't have the same intensity as the film for the first half, and they drag it down.

I will say Sewell definitely redeems himself in the second act. He plays Adam like this silent and downright malicious evil genius. It's completely brilliant, and quite terrifying. Wasson never does anything except look pretty in dresses and runs into battle only to be shot in the head with iron, and quickly dies. One out of two isn't horrible, I guess. I will also mention that one of the plot points was a very smart choice given the time period. I won't give it away because you should go see the movie.

I was surprised to see that one of my favorite actresses was the leading lady. I love Mary Elizabeth Winstead. She can do no wrong. Yes, I even loved her in the craptastic voyage that is Final Destination 3. I thought she was great as Mary Todd. She's an important part of Lincoln's development as a man, and she is definitely a strong supporting character.

I'm almost positive there are "glaring" historical inaccuracies, but I would also like to remind you that the film is called Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter. And do I really seem like the type to give a rat's ass about history? I didn't think so. So, for action, gore, an interesting plot and solid acting, I give it a 5/5. I was very entertained, and it was quite memorable. The only real flaw is villains that are a tiny bit weak to start, but come back with a bite (no pun intended).

Prometheus

I think this is one of those "abandon all hope" type of movies. I know I had high hopes that it was going to be the super amazing awesome prequel to Alien. I mean, just look at it from a technical standpoint: the running time is over 2 hours, and it's produced and directed by Ridley Scott. What could possibly go wrong? I'm starting to learn that if a movie plot seems awesome, it's going to suck.

This is such a letdown that I don't even have enough material to rip on. Nothing happens. I wish I was lying, but it's true. There are no gory kills, a mutinous crew or (like the rest of world was waiting for) aliens. Want to know why they called this the prequel to Alien? At the end, some humanoid race get impregnated by a face hugger, and the mutated result sort of resembles the alien we're used to seeing. It's one scene that doesn't even last 3 minutes.

Another problem is the casting. Well, 2 people in particular. Noomi Rapace plays Elizabeth Shaw, an archaeologist. Noomi Rapace is best known for playing Lisbeth Salander in the original The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. She also had a supporting part in Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows. In both films, she is the definition of bad-ass female action star. Naturally, I thought she would basically be Ripley's predecessor. The character is the opposite of that. That's not a bad thing, but Rapace just isn't known for playing weaker characters and that is blatantly obvious. She looks so uncomfortable, and it's hard to feel anything when you can see the actress doesn't care for the character either.

The big name is Charlize Theron. I'm guessing she's supposed to be the bitchy boss/minor villain. I didn't buy it. To be more exact, it just didn't make sense. What did she have against the crew chosen for this mission? My first thought was there was some underlying power struggle, but you later find out she was never going to inherit the company anyway. And that's another thing: the plot goes from trying to discover the beginning of mankind, to family politics. It's not a smooth transition.

I also have no idea what's going on with whoever is rating these movies, but they need to be fired. It's rated R, but there's no sex, no extreme gore, and I'm 90% positive they don't even drop an f bomb. The only scenes of gore are a guy gets his arm partially broken and you see a tiny bit of bone poking out, a couple people get set on fire, and a robot gets decapitated. Maybe I'm desensitized, but I'm pretty sure you see stuff like that in PG-13 movies, too.

I'm at a loss here. It's just two hours of nothing, and there's no sex or violence to make it mildly entertaining. My first review after a week, and it's a goose egg. I am very disappointed, Ridley Scott. If you want to see a space mission gone wrong, just watch Alien and don't hope for a decent prequel.