Riddick (2013) Movie Review

RIDDICK (2013) MOVIE REVIEW

Sorry for this review being so prolonged, anyhow, let's discuss the third and latest instalment in the Riddick franchise. 

After being left for dead on a sun-scorched planet, Riddick (Vin Diesel) must attempt to survive the intense heat and the predators that populate the planet. While doing this, he sees a campsite set near his location. With no one in sight, Riddick uses this opportunity to use an emergency beacon, which sends of a signal that attracts two ships. One carrying a group of bloodthirsty bounty hunters, and the other carrying a man from related to Riddick's past. Now on this planet and with these ships after him, Riddick must take down both groups and escape this hell hole of a planet. While watching the film you can instantly tell that the director wanted to go back to the feeling and story of the first film. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's just that it feels a bit too much like the first film in terms of it's story, which while not a bad thing, it just feels redundant as when these groups arrive, you can tell which ones are going to survive and which ones aren't, which bummed me out a bit. Overall, the story while not necessarily good, did provide context for the film and managed to make everything make sense (most of the time). 

Still of Jordi Molla, Nolan Gerard Funk, Katee Sackhoff and Conrad Pla

One of the things that threw me off of the last Riddick movie was that it didn't feel like the original. In Pitch Black, it was a simple survival of the fittest movie, which worked. While I did like Chronicles of Riddick, it just didn't capture the excitement and element of surprise that the first film did. Thankfully they learned their lesson with this movie as it really does feel like a Riddick movie, except with one major problem. The time it takes to reach the main point of the movie is just ludicrous  At the start of the movie, it shows how Riddick came to be on this planet and how he managed to survive until meeting these two groups, which is fine as long as it doesn't drag on and become extremely boring. I will be completely honest, at about 20 minutes in, I honestly checked my phone as it felt like an hour had passed, and no, I'm not joking. Though the first is not almost forgettable as Riddick manages to find a friend in a predator that very much resembles a dog. While this move of giving Riddick a pet is cheesy, it did make for some badass and funny moments. As for the CGI, I felt it was surprisingly strong as all the creatures that inhabit the planet look extremely badass, especially the animals resembling scorpions. 

Still of Vin Diesel fighting predator

While the movie was actually fairly fun, there is one aspect in the film that I cannot forgive as it was a big disappointment for me. At the start of the movie, it shows a scene of Riddick talking with Vaako after the events of Chronicles of Riddick. Now throughout the entire series, Vaako was always my favourite character as not only is he portrayed by my second favourite actor Karl Urban, he is just so badass in the way he acts and in the way he talks as he has so much authority in his voice. When I heard he was going to be in this movie, I immediately got excited and couldn't wait to see him back on the big screen. When the first scene ended with him and Riddick, I knew something bad was going to happen to Riddick and while it did happen, I did not expect something bad would happen to me as well. It turns out that that scene is the only one that features or even shows Vaako in all his glory. Honestly, if your going to waste talent like Karl Urban on one insignificant scene, just don't have him in the movie at all. They could have done so much with Vaako in this movie, for example, he could have been the one who sent one of the groups and when he sees that they fail, he goes down there to kill Riddick once and for all. This would have made for one badass fight scene and a potentially awesome ending to the movie. Instead, we get one boring scene where all they do is talk with one another. Hey, at least Bautista was badass in the movie right...right? In all seriousness though, he was. 

Still of Karl Urban and Vin Diesel

Overall, while this movie was extremely boring in the first half, it managed to pick up pace towards the second half with awesome fight sequences, good use of suspense and heaps of blood and gore. While not as good as the first film, I must say I believe it is just as good as the second (which to be honest, I'm not sure if it that's a good thing). 

OVERALL: 6.8/10

 

We're the Millers (2013) Movie Review

WE'RE THE MILLERS (2013) MOVIE REVIEW 

It's amazing how easy it is to smuggle drugs across the border and back (and believe it or not, that is not sarcasm).

As veteran drug dealer David Clark (Jason Sudeikis) begins having major financial trouble, his boss, Brad Gurdlinger (Ed Helms) gives him a job worth $100,000 where all he has to do is acquire a "smidge" of marijuana from Mexico to America. In order to do this, David gets the idea to form a fake family to pose as an average American family so they do not draw attention. To pull this off, David acquires the help of a stripper named Rose (Jennifer Aniston), a runaway named Casey (Emma Roberts) and his neighbour named Kenny (Will Poulter). Now hating each other, the four of them must all keep their cool and attempt at working together to get what they want, money. The premise of this movie is an interesting one I have to say as it shows that it can sometimes be hard to be someone that your not. I also liked how the story touched on the fact that in order to do something, no matter the job, your always going to need friends (or in this case family) to aid you in your job. Overall, the story was actually interesting, though you won't realise this until you have actually given the movie thought. 

Still of Emma Roberts, Jennifer Aniston, Will Poulter
 and Jason Sudeikis aka The Millers

While the movie had problems, I must say I enjoyed We're the Millers wayyyyy more than I expected. I think this was because of the actual family as the four leads in the movie had great chemistry as each played off one another, especially Jason Sudeikis and Jennifer Aniston who both did amazing jobs in this movie. The chemistry between these two managed to triumph above the rest as it was kind of a relationship where they both secretly like each other as friends, though try and push that out by just hating one another. However, this fanastic chemistry somehow did not make the movie for me, it was actually the son played by Will Pouter. Throughout majority of the film, he just had this really confused look on his face like he didn't know where he was or what to do, which just made me laugh uncontrollably  It basically was a derpy face he had going throughout the entire movie. While the film was hilarious, there was one aspect that I feel could have been left out of the movie or shortened to an extent.

Still of Ed Helms 

As said before, I mentioned that there was one story arch that could have shortened, and that is the segment with another tourist family. While I thought they were funny, I feel that the movie dragged on a bit because of them as they have to stay with them in the same area for a full day, which made the movie at times a little boring. I would have preferred that if for one reason or another, the other family was forced to travel with them, which would have made the film not drag on for at long as it did. Another part of the movie that took me out of the movie was one plot hole of the film, where one character becomes incapacitated and they all have to stay with him while they are on a strict time limit. The plot hole here is that why didn't David simply tell the others to wait at the hospital while he dropped the drugs off, and then he could just come back for them. I dunno, it just took me out of the film for a second which I felt wasn't terrible, though was not a positive by any meaning of the word. 

Still of Jennifer Aniston 

Overall, We're the Millers was just a funny movie. It had funny characters, a good meaning and manages to showcase Jason Sudeikis in a lead role, which he manages to nail. The film was way better than I thought it would be and managed to surprise me as I thought the movie was going to be mediocre at best. 

OVERALL: 7.4/10

White House Down (2013) Movie Review

WHITE HOUSE DOWN (2013) MOVIE REVIEW

Was Channing Tatum a better Gerald Butler? Was Jamie Foxx a better Aaron Eckhart? Was Maggie Gyllenhaal? Let's find out in this review for the second movie to come out this year revolving around the destruction of the White House.

Attempting to be the father that her daughter always wanted, Cale (Channing Tatum) attempts to win back his daughter Emily's love by enlisting in the secret service. While being questioned by Finnerty (Maggie Gyllenhaal), she explains to Cale how he has untapped potential, which happens to be the one thing that Cale needs for the job of protecting the President. On their way out, Emily and Cale go on a tour of the White House. While on this tour however, things start going south as the White House begins being attacked by terrorists who manage to take control of the entire building. Now the only hope for the safety of the President, Cale and President Sawyer (Jamie Foxx) must now get to safety and rescue the hostages in the building, which include Cale's daughter Emily. Since this is a Roland Emmerich film (Director of Independence Day, Godzilla and 2012), the plot is not supposed to be the leading thing in the movie however in this movie, he really attempts at making a solid and deep story. In my eyes, the plot did not manage to stick out one bit as there were only so few characters I cared about (these being Sawyer, Emily and maybe Finnerty) but that's about it. Overall, the plot was fairly decent though wasn't what made the film for me. 

Still of Channing Tatum, Joey King
and Jamie Foxx

One of the biggest reasons I enjoyed this movie was because while it did try to engage the audience with it's deep plot, I took it as a mindless action movie. And I'm glad I did as when you don't think about whats going on and just accept it, the film instantly picks up a couple of points. Even with that, the film did have some problems. One of the biggest for me was the ludicrously long running time of 2 hours. This isn't necessarily the films fault as with all of the movies made this guy, they all seem really bloated and it seems that at least two or maybe even three scenes could have been erased from the movie and it would have been perfect. Speaking of this, this brings me to another problem with the movie. That is that there are some points in the movie that seem unnecessary and are only there for character development. A perfect example of this is the inclusion of Emily's mum as she is only in the movie at the start and end. If she was just taken out at the start, it would have been a shorter and to be frank, a better film in my opinion. These problems are by no means the actors faults as in my opinion, that was the films best aspect. These problems managed to come about due to a poor script at times and just poor directing. 

Still of James Woods in Presidential Office

Like I previously stated, the best thing I thought came out of this movie was the acting shown by basically everyone in this film. Channing Tatum and Jamie Foxx managed to steal the show as their chemistry was really good and funny in the movie. For someone as old as James Woods, I was actually surprised by his acting in this movie as it is still as good as it ever was in Once Upon A Time in America (though nowhere near as good). Easily my favourite actor in this movie was actually an actor that is rapidlly becoming one of my favourite actors, and that is the actor that Stenz aka Jason Clarke. Ever since I watched him in Lawless and The Great Gatsby, he's become one of my favourite actors and since he was born in Winton, that just makes everything that much better. When going into the movie, I thought it was going to have a few funny moments and just balls to the walls action. However, they actually take a more comedic route which to be honest, I rolled with as with these funny actors in the movie, it would seem weird for them to be in a dramatic role (Excluding...well..everyone in the movie, but you get the idea). Overall, the acting I feel was the best thing about this movie and really showed off some surprising performances.

Still of Jason Clarke 

Overall, White House Down was an enjoyable enough film and managed to keep entertained. While many people may compare this to Olympus Has Fallen, White House Down manages to hold its own just fine due to good acting, fun and entertaining action and hilarious dialogue. Since I have not seen Olympus Has Fallen yet, I cannot say which one is better, though even if I had seen it, I think it would be hard to decide on which is superior.

OVERALL: 6.7/10

  

Jobs (2013) Movie Review

JOBS (2013) MOVIE REVIEW

After the death of Steve Jobs, it was inevitable that a film would be made telling how he became such an influential man. Does all of this translate well onto the big screen? Well...

If you haven't already guessed by now, Jobs is the story of Steve Job's and his ascension from college drop-out to one of the most influential innovators of the 20th century. Now for the most part, most of the information needed does make an appearance in the film, though this wasn't the films problem. Jobs problem was that it felt rushed as after the halfway point, the director seemed like he just decided to shoehorn in all the events and call it a movie. For example, Steve finds out that Microsoft has ripped off his idea and used it at their company. As a result, Steve calls Bill Gates and begins rambling on how he is going to sue him for every dollar he owns. At this point, I got excited as I wanted to see where this was going to lead to. Once he hangs up the phone, that is all you hear of that conflict throughout the rest of the movie. Literally the most interesting part to me had begun and ended in the span of one phone call, or just over 1 minute. However, Jobs did manage to tell the complete story and considering the material it had, the film could have done a better job at portraying that story. 

Still of Ashton Kutcher and Josh Gad

As for the actual film, the movie's main problem was by no means because of the acting as I felt it was really solid. This was mainly due to Ashton's great performance as Steve Jobs as he really had all the social aspects that Steve was known for, particularly his posture and personality. On the topic of his personality, I did like that the film did not try and sugar coat anything as Steve is particularly known for being an aggressive person when something does not work out in his favour. However this positive once again revolves back to a negative as the film had a good streak of anger going for it, then the movie decided to shoehorn so much anger and assholeary (that's a word now) into Steve's personality so much that the audience deciding whether they should root and respect this man anymore, this is particularly a negative when considering Steve Jobs has only been deceased for not even two years. Also, the movie appeared as though it was afraid to try something different. It was too afraid to take risks and when compared to other biographical movies, it really does show. For example, The Social Network as a movie was fantastic as for one it made an accurate representation of the events and secondly, took many risks regarding whether the audience would agree, which majority did. Lastly, the film according to reliable sources, did not fully show an accurate representation of the events. To be honest, when you have Steve Wozniak, the co-founder of Apple and a crucial role in this movie, questioning the characters and plot, you know something is not quite right.

Comparison of Steve Jobs and
Ashton Kutcher

Now let's go into more depth regarding the acting. For the most part, I felt it was particularly strong from Ashton which I already mentioned, though many other people who played crucial roles were good in their roles. Dermot Mulroney was really good as Mike and it really showed how he, while did care about Steve as a friend, wanted to company to succeed in his vision. Also, John Gad was good in his incredibly crucial role as Steve Wozniak, though I think that he was not the perfect choice for the role but then again, I can't think of anyone else so what do I know? Anyhow, the acting did manage to show some stand out performances and to be frank, this movie showed that Ashton Kutcher can take on serious roles all while maintaining his great acting ability. 

Still of John Gad and Ashton Kutcher 

Overall, Jobs was in mine and many people's eyes, a disappointment  This was not because that the movie was terrible, it was because that the director had such great source material to work off that he could have created a masterpiece like Gandhi or The Social Network. Although someone else may make another biographical picture on Steve Jobs legacy, it will never make us forget of that one movie about Steve Jobs that was made that didn't show the entire story.

OVERALL: 6.2/10