Your Highness Review

Rating: 1/5

Danny Mcbride is one of my favorite comedic actors. His way of getting laughs just really hits me in the funny bone. On whether it is on Eastbound and Down or in Pineapple Express, the man steals every scene he's in. Even when paired with people like Seth Rogen, he's amazing. Too bad his monumental talent is completely wasted in Your Highness.

Thaddeus (Danny Mcbride) is the younger brother of the great hero Fabious (James Franco). Where Fabious is a stoic, strong, and mighty hero, Thaddeus is always pushed to the side and doesn't have much self esteem. When Fabious' bride to be (Zooey Deschanel) is kidnapped by Lazar (Justin Theroux), the two brothers must embark on an epic journey to save her.

What follows is a series of gross and unfunny scenes the likes of which I haven't seen since Epic Movie. Every single joke falls flat, and the actors look embarrassed to speak the dialogue. I get that it's poking fun at Krull and the Beastmaster movies, but it doesn't work. Like Green Hornet, the movie centers around one joke: Danny Mcbride is in a fantasy world.

As a result, the terrible, TERRIBLE script written by Theroux stays completely tethered to that one joke, and the actors are given nothing to work with. Instead of being the Danny Mcbride or the James Franco we know and love, the leads end up being dumb archetypes and their signature humor can't shine through.

Your Highness is more of a tragedy than a comedy. It had so much promise to be one of the funniest movies of 2011, but the filmmakers ended up making a forgettable stupid action-comedy. I don't think that this will be too much of a blemish on the actors' resumes but it was disappointing nonetheless. The only people I can see liking Your Highness are 13-year-old boys who love penis jokes. Now, I'm going to re-watch Eastbound and Down so I don't lose hope.

Insidious Review

Rating: 4/5

When it comes to horror nowadays, it's usually bad. Horror films are always either remakes or sequels, and the rare original ones rely way too much on jump scares. For me, there is a huge difference between a surprising movie and a scary movie. For example, The Unborn is surprising, and Insidious is scary.

Renee and Josh (Rose Byrne and Patrick Wilson) have just moved into their new house with their three children. Things are off to a bad start when their oldest son, Dalton, falls into a coma. Three months later, Dalton is still unconscious, and scary stuff starts happening. The family tries to move away, but they start to think that the house isn't the problem.

As I said, what most horror movies are missing completely nowadays is atmosphere. When scares happen in films like Darkness Falls, all that happens is a loud noise and something pops out. In movies like The Ring, there's a buildup of a feeling of absolute dread. The feeling is necessary to have so that people are scared of what might happen rather than what they know will happen.

Insidious accomplishes this magnificently with dark scenery, great sound design, and the fact that we don't see the scary stuff for most of the movie. As a result, when the ghosts and demons haunting the main characters show up, we're more scared than if they just dragged people into the darkness every three seconds. Of course, there are silly scenes, especially once the psychic comes into the plot, but most of it works very well. Of course, without good acting it's all for naught, and all the leads do their job well.

Insidious does the job of proving that the Saw guys weren't only good at gore effects. This movie proves that they can sculpt real terror in their audience, and do it well. Next time you want to be scared, go see Insidious. It's a lot of fun.

Source Code Review

Rating: 4/5


Science fiction is a genre that is really hard to pull of well. Not only do sci-fi writers have to come up with a good story, but they have to come up with a story that has some sort of crazy science to it that makes it unique. Time travel is usually a good place to start, but the story won't work unless there's a creative spin on it. Then, you need to make it plausible, so that it's not too fictional. Good thing Source Code does this stuff.

Captain Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhaal) wakes up and finds himself in the body of a complete strangers, surrounded by strangers, and on a train. The woman in front of him (Michelle Monaghan) somehow knows him, and after eight minutes, the train explodes. Stevens then wakes up in a strange capsule, where he is told by Goodwin (Vera Farmiga) that the army is making Stevens relive the last eight minutes of one of the victims of a train bombing, so that he can find the bomber and prevent further attacks.

Ok, the "science" in this movie is absurd. Assassin's Creed level absurd. There is no way that anybody could ever relive and control the experiences of someone who was burned up in an explosion. And yet, the movie is smart enough and well written enough that I just went along with it. Even though the ending is a stretch and quite hokey, I could still buy the whole "genetic memory" thing. This of course is helped by the great performances. Gyllenhaal, Farmiga, Monaghan, and Jeffrey Wright (a brilliant actor who plays the creator of the machine) are all great. The characters are well developed, which really adds to the atmosphere of the film.

Because Captain Stevens gets to know the characters in the simulation, we do as well, and each moment waiting for the explosion we know is coming is tough. The editing is also of note. Source Code never stops moving, and it's really really cool how Duncan Jones and his team put it all together. Overall, Source Code isn't groundbreaking, but it's good. I recommend it.

Sucker Punch Review

Rating: 1/5

When I write a review for a movie like Sucker Punch, I take a risk. By receiving it negatively, I am usually set upon by every nerd on the Internet. I have received several comments and facebook messages telling me I have no taste and don't know what I'm talking about. According to these commenters, I should not only write a positive review of Kick-Ass and Daybreakers and Splice, but I should celebrate them for being breaks from the norm. If that's the case, I am offended to be asked to celebrate exploitation like Sucker Punch.

Baby Doll is put in an asylum by her evil stepfather who wants her inheritance. It turns out that the asylum is actually some sort of brothel run by the villainous Blue and his goons. Luckily, Baby Doll has the power to mesmerize sleazy guys by doing a sexy dance, which gives her friends the time to gather a list of items that will help them escape. The process of getting the items is represented by weird fantasies where the gal pals fight monsters and stuff.

Zack Snyder's big thing about this movie is that it's empowering to women, which is rare in mainstream Hollywood films. Usually heroines are only told for their looks and often mess up more than help for the sake of comic relief. Sucker Punch not only fails to break the trend, but ends up reinforcing it. It is true that the main characters are girls and do kick some ass, but they are not independent or strong.

The characters in Sucker Punch completely rely on their attractiveness, which is exploited throughout the film. Without Baby Doll's dancing (throughout which she is dressed up as a little girl and looks humiliated and unhappy), the girls would not be able to escape. In the fantasy scenes, the girls where impractical and overtly revealing fetish suits, such as a dominatrix suit and a stewardess uniform that's not buttoned up all the way. The girls do kick ass, but not without the leadership of a wise old man.

Where was I? Oh yeah, the movie. You know that stupid slow-mo then speed up thing Zach Snyder loves? Instead of keeping it to the action, the effect is in every scene of Sucker Punch. When that's not happening, the scenes are just slow motion, making 5 minute action scenes into 10 minute ones. The story doesn't make any sense, the music is horrible, the acting is bad, every action scene is a ripoff of an anime or a video game, and it's BORING.

In the end, Sucker Punch is just an exploitation movie. Sure the cgi is nice and the story is kind of original, but does such shameless sexual pandering to the libidos of teenage boys deserve celebration because there's a dragon and zombies? In the end, is Sucker Punch any different from I Spit on Your Grave? I don't think so, and if the audience this film exploits wants to be taken seriously by "old farts" like Roger Ebert, maybe they should stop supporting garbage like this.

Paul Review

Rating: 3.5/5

I do not like to be called a nerd. Not that anybody really does, but there seems to be a trend in "nerd pride" lately that I simply do not understand. Yes, I like science fiction, comic books, video games, and the like, but I don't think that makes me a nerd. If I didn't talk to girls, only ate cheetos, and actively played tabletop RPG's, then I would be a nerd. I don't do any of those things, so I am not a nerd. On the other hand, Paul is one of the only movies I've ever seen that made me almost proud to be called a nerd.

Graeme and Clive (Simon Pegg and Nick Frost respectively) are two English geeks who've come to America for comic-con and to tour the country's UFO hotspots. Outside of Area 51 the two run into an alien named Paul (Seth Rogen) and begin a cross country journey to get the little green guy back to his ship before the FBI catches them.

Even though Edgar Wright isn't involved and Seth Rogen hasn't been on top of his game lately, Paul is very funny. Not exorbitantly funny, but enjoyable to say the least. The vulgar humor combined with the endless nerdy references melds creates snappy dialogue and good jokes. That isn't to say its perfect however. Some of the jokes inevitably fall flat and a couple of conversations end up going nowhere. However, what works works well and Pegg and Frost definitely new how to write the movie.

As usual, Pegg and Frost work very well together and are very funny, especially combined with Seth Rogen's chain-smoking, foul mouthed character of Paul. SNL alums Kristen Wiig and Bill Hader are welcome additions, and each bring something funny to the table. Jason Bateman is a little boring, but he's made up for by everyone else.

The only real problem I had with Paul was the directing. Greg Mottola is a talented guy, but it felt more like the actors were just going at it instead of him giving any real directing. Other than that, Paul is a very funny movie. It won't usurp Get Him to the Greek or The Hangover, but it is worth seeing, especially if you are into the things the characters make fun of.

Battle: Los Angeles Review

Rating: 4/5

Whenever a film like Battle LA comes out, movie critics take the chance to point out that it isn't 2001: A Space Odyssey or District 9. According to these critics, because Battle LA doesn't have the emotional or philosophical depth of the aforementioned classics, it should be ignored and its creators should never work again. And if you enjoy Battle LA, you are a teenage loser virgin who sits in their basement all day long playing Halo and writing fan-fiction. I'm saying all this because according to Rotten Tomatoes, what I just stated is true. I'm here to tell you that it's not.

Staff Sergeant Nantz (Aaron Eckhart) is about to retire. He's done four tours in Iraq and lost too many friends. Suddenly, the human race finds itself at war with a seemingly unstoppable alien race determined to wipe out everything they see. Sgt. Nantz is deployed into Los Angeles, the last bastion of humanity on the American west coast, with the goal of rescuing civilians, and ends up in the middle of a war zone with no way out.

This movie is awesome. The action is intense, the characters, while unmemorable, are human and real, and the aliens are actually smart, moving and thinking like a highly trained military unit. The only reason that the marines triumph at all is because of luck. The script has every war movie cliche of all time, but it all works in a weid way. I actually felt like I was there a couple of times.

The best thing in Battle LA is the atmosphere. When the marines march through Santa Monica, there are dead people and destroyed things all over. The aliens aren't seen until late, and there are moments that truly seem hopeless. It's really well made, and it doesn't try to be District 9, which is good. Also, it's not Halo. Halo is a silly game about a giant green tetris block shooting aliens. Battle LA is about real people fighting desperately against them.

Critics hated this movie. But I'm a critic, and I really liked it. I had a great time. It might be generational, but I think I just saw a good movie. Skip Red Riding Hood, skip Take Me Home Tonight, see Battle LA with a bunch of friends.

Rango Review

Rating: 4.5/5

True detail is hard to capture on film. If you over-stretch your special effects, they become overly noticeable. If you make an animated feature, it's hard to not look like Pixar. Even then, it's hard to be good. Go to IMDB and see how many movies like Igor and Planet 51 and Happily N'Ever After there are, and you'll know what I mean. Now we come to Rango.

Rango (Johnny Depp) gets thrown out of his terrarium by accident and drops smack into the mojave desert. Guided by a mystical armadillo (Alfred Molina) and narrated by mariachi owls, Rango finds himself in the middle of a water conspiracy land grab. He quickly becomes a hero in the town of 'Dirt,' and is named sheriff. Now, Rango must not only live up to the legend that he made up, but help the townsfolk.

I have no idea how you direct an animated movie, but Gore Verbinski does an outstanding job here. I love The Ring and Pirates of the Caribbean, and I love Rango. He coaxes wonderful performances out of each of the actors. This is helped out by the magnificent writing, which has incredible dialogue and action sequences.

If you go back to my True Grit review, you'll understand how much I love westerns. And Rango is a western, there's no doubt about it. There's a dastardly land grabber, a spunky love interest just trying to save her dad's land, a legendary gunman, a villainous yet honorable outlaw, and even a nervous and sophisticated banker with little glasses. And even though they're all anthropomorphic animals, it all melds together into a great movie.

Finally, Rango is arguably the best looking CG-Animated film ever made. The attention to detail put into this movie is nothing short of absolutely astounding. Everything is in absolutely perfect sync, and the story is told perfectly through the gorgeous animation. The voices are perfect (except a rather boring Timothy Olyphant), and the story is a magnificent western journey. Not True Grit good, but damn good. Go see it.