The Avengers (2012)

A surplus of superhero movies has come out in the past few years, particularly Iron Man from 2008 and its 2010 sequel, The Incredible Hulk from 2008, Thor from 2011, and Captain America: The First Avenger from 2011. To be honest, I’ve only seen one of the movies I mentioned (Iron Man), but I do know that through end scenes or post-credit sequences, they’ve all found a way to connect themselves to one another. Why is that? Well, I am not the director of those movies, but I can only guess that it is to set up and release, after years and years of wishing and hoping and praying, especially from Marvel Comics fans, an Avengers movie.

The story of this Avengers movie begins with an energy source called the Tesseract, which has an unknown potential. At a remote research facility, the Tesseract is being experimented on. However, when the Tesseract activates, it opens a portal, which allows the villainous Loki to reach Earth. He captures the Tesseract and plans to enslave all humans.

This leads Nick Fury, director of the S.H.I.E.L.D. agency, to plan the Avengers. So, he, along with several agents (one of these agents being Natasha Romanoff, a.k.a. Black Widow), goes to recruit people to bond together as the Avengers. Not just any people, however. They recruit Tony Stark, a.k.a. Iron Man, Bruce Banner, a.k.a. The Hulk, Steve Rogers, a.k.a. Captain America, Clint Barton, a.k.a. Hawkeye, and Thor, who happens to be the adoptive brother of Loki.

Now, like I said earlier, many people, particularly Marvel Comics fans, longed for this movie. This could’ve been just an empty, messy, cynical project that trashed the fans. However, director and screenwriter Joss Whedon, who previously directed the 2005 film, Serenity, delicately put together a taut, palpable, and endlessly captivating film that gives fans and non-fans something to admire. 

I was surprised by two elements of this movie. One element was the humor, particularly by Tony Stark, who is dead-on with his dry, caustic sense of humor. Everybody brings real wit in a movie that could’ve been a serious action film. I admire that extra push to add something juicier in the film for the audience.

Another element I was surprised of was the character development, particularly the dynamic between Thor and Loki. It’s always great to have a relationship like that, where the protagonist has a deep relationship with the antagonist. To me, that served as melancholy for the film. Black Widow, who I heard was downplayed in Iron Man 2, is a fiercely cunning femme fatale, when she could’ve easily been just some bland piece of eye candy.

I’ve heard a few people complain slightly about the first hour, but I personally felt the film moved at a precise pace. The first hour of the film is getting all these great superheroes together, the backstory, the tension between these people, and the build-up. The second hour is the pay-off, although that might be an understatement. That second half, especially the last 25 minutes or so, is one gigantic, kinetic, furious, incredible action sequence. There are a few action sequences in the first half, as well, but they seem like mere YouTube videos, compared to the last half. Everything that the Avengers have been planning for finally comes into place, spectacularly and tightly.

I’m sure all of my three readers out there are going to ask what my favorite character is. My favorite character was The Hulk. I’ve loved the Hulk ever since I was seven, when I saw the advertisements for that 2003 Hulk movie (and yes, I liked that movie). The filmmakers did a great job with his CGI. They turned a cool menace from the 2003 film into a rugged badass. Although I find it weird that when he and Thor have their fight scene, the Hulk has a hard time picking up Thor’s hammer. If I were the Hulk, I would’ve picked up the building, hoping that his head would be crushed or something. Everyone who goes to see this movie will have their own geek-out moment for one of the characters and when the Hulk was on, my geek-o-meter went to ten.

The cast is uniformly excellent. I already mentioned Robert Downey, Jr.’s great nuances as Tony Stark and Scarlett Johansson’s fast cunning as Black Widow, but everyone from Chris Evans as Captain America, Chris Hemsworth as Thor, Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye, and Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner, play their parts totally convincing. I was surprised, however, how much Samuel L. Jackson was downplayed. However, his Nick Fury character is, kind of, just the ringleader, but either way, while he was the least effective, he still maintained his noteworthy menacing authority. Tom Hiddleston as Loki is, also, effective and convincing.

However, as much as I give praise to the movie, I do have a few flaws with the movie. First of all, I felt that it was cut a little too quickly. I understand that’s kind of the point since the action is fast, but I still felt that I should be able to comprehend the action a little better.

In addition, and this is where I have to do some ranting, involves the post-credit sequences, a.k.a. the stingers. I feel I should warn you readers that, if not all the way, at least sit through some of the credits because there is one scene that could possibly set up a sequel, which I have to admit is gripping. However, apparently I learned that at the very end of all the credits, there is another scene, which leads to me to say I HATE stingers!

Seriously, I feel like I shouldn’t have to sit through the credits to see something. You can easily place it before the credits or wait and put it on DVD. Maybe the filmmakers want to seem edgy or innovative, but it doesn’t make you very innovative when everybody else is also FREAKING DOING IT! I can’t stand these stingers. If I ever make a list of my top 10 least favorite clichés, the stinger is, most DEFINITELY going in the top five, if not the top three. It’s cheap, it’s stupid, it’s a lousy gimmick, and I beg on my knees to Hollywood, PLEASE stop using that cliché, for the love of God! Those are my only flaws, but besides that, while I don’t love the movie, it is a extremely satisfying film that delivers on all aspects and is definitely worth the hype. Plus, Scarlett Johansson wears tight, leather clothing, as she portrays Black Widow, and Cobie Smulders is S.H.I.E.L.D. agent, Maria Hill. Need I say more?

RATING: Three-and-a-half stars out of four

Spirited Away (2001)

I want to start off this review by saying that this review is one of the most personal reviews I have ever written. Not just because it is about anime, my favorite form of animation, though that helps, but because 2001’s Spirited Away is my “boss’s” favorite movie. If her favorite movie ever changes, I will now have a reason to see it.

The plot revolves around a little girl named Chihiro, who is very upset by having to move to a new neighborhood. They arrive at a place, to which the father believes it is an abandoned theme park from the early 1990s. Suddenly, after something happens to her parents, she finds herself alone in an alternate reality that is filled with spirits and monsters. Chihiro, by getting a job working in Yabuba’s bathhouse and befriending a friend by the name of Haku, tries to find a way to get out of this alternate reality and get back to the real world.

Many critics have touted this film, with some claiming that it is similar to the 1951 Disney film, Alice in Wonderland. However, this film is much more tight and, at times, complex than that Disney film. The animation is, as always, simply masterful. When you are not looking at the realism of the animation, you are drawn by the breathtaking creativity. I nearly sprained my eyes looking from side to side at all the surreal creatures present in this alternate reality. These creatures lack the kind of simple whimsicality that would be present in an American animated film. A lot of these creatures, given the fact that a lot of them don’t speak, seem to have an unsure menace. You don’t know whether to be excited or frightened by these creatures.

Also, the characters are authentic, particularly Chihiro. When she finds herself in this alternate reality, she doesn’t automatically become a plucky, courageous character. She is confused and scared, which is most likely how we would be if we were put in this uncomfortable position. Because of this, she feels real and we root for her all the way. I, also, love the way depth is given to certain characters. You find out certain things about certain characters, but it doesn’t feel contrived. Also, the relationship between Chihiro and Haku, who kind of looks like the inspiration for Yu-Gi-Oh, is wonderful. I love how the director, Hayao Miyazaki, handles relationships between kids. They never end with them being romantically linked, but they never say that they aren’t. We have to decide what’s going on between them.

This film is elegant, graceful, and beautiful. I love the way the movie seamlessly blends ambitious creativity, social commentary, delightful comedy, and heartfelt drama. Even the score, especially, near the end is simply perfect. I don’t understand why America can’t make films as intelligent as the films Miyazaki makes. We get so much empty, soulless rubbish that we just spoon-feed our children. Even the best Disney film isn’t as intelligent as Miyazaki’s films. I swear Disney knows it, too. No wonder they keep distributing them. Hayao Miyazaki, I tip my hat to you. I can’t wait to watch the next film of yours on this Studio Ghibli Museum DVD set I borrowed from a friend. This film may not be Totoro, but damn it, it’s second best.

On a scale of zero to four stars, Spirited Away gets four stars! By the way, here’s a message to my boss, a.k.a. Tia. Here’s another reason why you’re awesome: You love this movie!

Porco Rosso (1992)

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Anime is the greatest form of animation of all time and Hayao Miyazaki is the quintessential anime director. However, one of the weaker entries from Miyazaki’s Studio Ghibli company is 1992’s Porco Rosso.

The story revolves around Porco Rosso, who was, at one point; a WWI flying ace named Marco Pagot, but has been transformed into a pig whose only job now is to be a bounty hunter chasing air pirates. He, also, spends time at the Hotel Adriano with his friend, Gina, who is also the hotel owner. One day, an American pilot attacks Porco and he crashes, to where he takes his plane to Milan, where a mechanic, Piccolo, and his granddaughter, Flo, reside, to have his plane repaired. Many things occur such as growing chemistry between Porco and Flo and an offer that Porco can’t refuse.

The star of this movie is, as always, the animation. Just read my My Neighbor Totoro review. How I described the animation in that movie also applies to this movie. One shot in this film that I adore is in a flashback sequence where Porco is his human self on a cloud as the fallen men in WWI float up to Heaven on their planes. That single shot is one of the most poetic and moving shots I’ve ever seen in an animated picture. The battle scenes, while not anything magnificent, are pretty rousing, as well.

The story is pretty simplistic. While it didn’t leave as big an impact on me as past Studio Ghibli films I’ve seen had, I appreciate that Hayao Miyazaki decided to just tell a normal story mixed with wit, a small portion of Miyazaki’s notable, original creativity (seriously, a former WWI flying ace turned into a pig) and even some history. The film takes place during a time when fascism imprisoned its citizens and economic hardships were plenty. Some may obtain a bitter feeling from this history, especially if one grew up around that time. Also, there are moments, especially at the end, where the movie echoes Casablanca.

The characters, while not as effective as the characters from previous Studio Ghibli films, are still pretty satisfying. I didn’t find the villains all that exciting, but they did provide some funny comic relief. I like the way Porco is made into a subtle and, occasionally brooding, character. I, also, like the character of Gale, who is a classy woman kind of like Ingrid Bergman or Audrey Hepburn and, also, has a seductive, mystique quality about her, to where I thought she could make a great femme fatale, if placed in another movie. The character I liked the most was Flo. I love her bewilderment and her almost charming obsession towards Porco. Seriously, she wants to kiss him several times throughout the film. Pepe le Pew looks at her and goes, “ Take it easy, my friend.”

The reason I say that this movie is one of Studio Ghibli’s weaker efforts is because of the reason that I keep mentioning: not as effective or impactive. It didn’t engross me like I feel an anime movie should and, at times, I was actually a tad bit bored watching the movie. However, the weakest effort of Studio Ghibli is better than half of the American animated movies that come out every year.

RATING: An enthusiastic three stars out of four!

My Neighbor Totoro (1988)

Japanese animation, or anime, is, in my opinion, the greatest form of animation ever. Anime is much more detailed, vivid, creative, and even, at times, edgier than traditional American animation. It entraces me every time I watch it. In my opinion, the best example of entrancing anime (although, this statement is subject to change if I watch more anime) is the whimsical, gentle, and delightful 1988 film, My Neighbor Totoro.

The story revolves around two joyful and enthusiastic little girls, Satsuke and Mei, who move to a new house with their father, while their mother is in the hospital. However, it turns out that this is no ordinary house as they find little magical dust balls called soot sprites inhabiting inside. Eventually, the girls discover that this house is in a magical forest that is inhabited by mystical creatures called Totoros. The main Totoro the girls befriend is O Totoro, who is the king of the forest, who leads them on a series of wonderments.

I was surprised how intelligent the story was. It is way more so than any other Disney-Pixar film. What I love about the story is when the kids tell their dad about these strange sightings. He goes to check on them and they are nowhere to be found. In American films, the parent would laugh it off and the kids would desperately try to convince him throughout the film, until the dad cracks and sees in great astonishment that his kids were right. In this movie, he is already convinced and encourages his kids.

Another situation they handle well in this movie is how a boy named Kanta begins to develop feelings for Satsuke. Of course, like in any movie, they tease each other. However, in an American film, the boy would be trying to flirt with her or be all goofy or he’d be blushing, to where in the end, he would either be going out with her or it would be suggested that he would be going out with her. In this film, the fear and desperation is really captured. He sees her and runs away (usually, women run away from me just because). They eventually become closer, but it is never stated that if they ever start dating. As far as we know, they could be living a Revolutionary Road-type marriage. This clearly shows now only the intelligence of the filmmakers, but also the fact that they tried hard to make a film that doesn’t patronize kids or doesn’t just pander to them without any actual depth inside.

The movie is whimsical, right down to the score, which is childish, but yet has elegance in it. I even liked the closing song which combines Chinese melodies with 80s pop. Also, for a movie with such surreal creatures, the movie is surprisingly subtle. All of these creatures are in the movie, but they are never shoved in your face. They kind of enter and establish their place in the story, instead of suffocating it. Because of this, there is actually a lot of build-up for certain things to happen, which I find refreshing. 

I, also, like the way the movie combines surreal images, quiet, atmospheric scenes, and even some moments of gentle, human comedy. I, also, love that this movie is all about bewilderment and has very little conflict. There is barely any drama until after the first hour or so. Some may find it boring, but I find it ingenious. Sometimes, life is all about whimsy and happiness.

The characters in the film are great. Satsuke and Mei are two of the most lovable child leads in all of cinema. They look at the world with intense excitement and curiosity. I favor towards Mei. Not just because she is so damn adorable, but her character, for a five-year-old, is surprisingly brave, kind of like a female Tommy Pickles from Rugrats. She approaches any situation with humor and courage. Also, a character that caught me off guard as in how much I genuinely loved him was the father. In American children’s films, fathers are usually the workers, the fuddy-duddies. Here, the father shares the same bewilderment as his children. He’s joyful and enthusiastic, to the point where we share his enthusiasm.

I saw the English dub version of this. I’m pretty sure it’s the 1993 dub. I am aware that another dub of the film was released in 2005. Either way, the voices are dubbed perfectly. I, actually, am 85% sure it’s the 1993 dub, because it says that Cheryl Chase voiced Mei and echoes of her Angelica Pickles character (my last Rugrats reference, I promise) was heard in Mei. 

However, the real star of the film is the animation. I think everything I said about anime in general pertains here, too. I am just astonished, though, in how detailed and alive the animation is. I, also, love the creativity in the animation. Not just of Totoro, but of other creatures, especially the Catbus. The film was directed by Hayao Miyazaki, the man responsible for nearly half of the anime in the world, who really has a specific vision and must really push his animators for his vision to be shown as flawless as it is. I love his audacity, his inventiveness, and his ability to think outside of the box while pushing the envelope. Seriously, who would ever think of a Catbus?

Also, the main reason why I love this film more than past anime films I’ve seen, such as Howl’s Moving Castle and Castle in the Sky, is because while this introduced a technical achievement as those two films I mentioned did as well, Totoro has emotion and we feel a deeper connection with him than a castle. In fact, this whole movie has a gigantic heart, so much so that I could actually pay attention to the story and characters, more so than the animation. However, maybe it’s my perverse, gutter-stained mind, but my only gripe with the film is a scene where the father and daughters are bathing in a tub together. Maybe it’s just me, but I found that moment unsettling and a little creepy. However, that’s barely a complaint because everything else towers over that.

On a scale of zero to four stars, My Neighbor Totoro gets four stars! If you are a fan of anime, definitely seek this film out. If you’re not a fan of anime, don’t read my reviews anymore.

Tropic Thunder (2008)

The genre of parody films has been around for a while. In my opinion, parodies can be some of the most fun movies to see. Most of them are “critic-proof.” They aren’t about the story, characters, or even performances, mostly. They are about satirizing movies and they are judged on how well they do it. Parody films go back to the Mel Brooks films of the ‘70s (High Anxiety, Blazing Saddles). However, the success of one movie, Airplane!, caused an uproar where many filmmakers tried to satirize different film genres. However, now that Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer are on this planet (Meet the Spartans, anyone?), it’s more of a formula. Don’t get me wrong. It was a formula, then, too, but it is more so now and less clever. One of the more original and clever parody films of recent years is the 2008 film, Tropic Thunder.

Tropic Thunder revolves around a group of actors, Tugg Speedman, Kirk Lazarus, Alpa Chino (get it?), Jeff Portnoy, and Kevin Sandusky, who are in a Vietnam War film, based on a memoir. The director of this film claims that it will be the most expensive war film ever made. However, the actors are egotistic prima donnas and production is one month behind schedule. After the film is threatened with cancellation if production doesn’t get back on track, the director decides to put these actors in a real battle-like situation. However, the actors think that it is actually part of the movie and many crazy situations ensue, including one of the actors being captured by a heroin manufacturing company that happens to be a big fan of the actor.

Right from the beginning, you know that this is going to be something special. It begins with an ad for Booty Sweat Energy Drink. Then, it shows us trailers for films with titles like, Scorched VI: Global Meltdown, The Fatties: Fart Two, and Satan’s Alley. This is one of the better parody films in quite a while. Most films parody certain films or genres. This film, brilliantly, parodies Hollywood in general. Also, if you think about it, it starts out kind of like a mockumentary version of the documentary, Hearts of Darkness, about Francis Ford Coppola directing Apocalypse Now. The opening of this film is the director trying to make this great war film and complications ensue. Also, I thought of the jungle stuff like a live-action version of the 2005 animated film Ben Stiller was in called Madagascar, in the way that it is about people taken out of their normal, comfortable environment and transported somewhere else. ALSO, I thought of the film as, partly, a parody of found footage films like, The Blair Witch Project, in the sense that it’s people being put in situations and a movie is based around that. Ben Stiller, who proves to be just as talented a director as he is an actor, directed the film. The cinematography for the film is bright, crisp and, for a comedy, shockingly beautiful.

The casting is dead-on perfect. Ben Stiller is very funny as Tugg Speedman, the cynical, somewhat neurotic, action star, as is Jack Black as Jeff Portnoy, the drug-addicted comedian. Also, like the best comedies out there, there is a great supporting troupe. Jay Baruchel of How to Train Your Dragon and The Sorcerer’s Apprentice fame is overshadowed, but is very good as a newcoming actor, Kevin Sadunsky, Brandon T. Jackson is funny as Alpa Chino, a rapper who has a deep secret, Danny McBride is very funny as the pyrotechnics operator, and Nick Nolte is very good as John “Four Leaf” Tayback, the man whose memoir the movie within the movie is based on. He is an armless Vietnam War veteran. Or is he? My favorite in the movie was an unrecognizable Tom Cruise as Les Grossman, the cynical studio executive, who brings such intensity to his role and delivers some of the funniest lines. There are more celebrity roles and cameos, but I won’t bore anymore with those. You can see the film for yourself.

Of course, the stand out of the film is Robert Downey, Jr. as Kirk Lazarus.

He scored two big hits in 2008 with this film and Iron Man and, call me crazy, I think this is best of those two roles. What is amazing about him is how audacious his role is and how committed he is. The character is an African-American and since Robert Downey, Jr. is Caucasian, the role could’ve been stereotypical and even offensive to African Americans (*insert Soul Plane joke here*). However, he plays it straight and, not once, is the joke based around the fact that a white guy is playing a black guy. The joke is how committed actors can be when it comes to playing their role. That’s a lot funnier. And the fact that he is playing an Academy Award winning actor makes the role even juicier. In fact, there were times where I thought that Robert Downey, Jr. was an African-American.

However, there is another star that should be mention: the acerbic and very funny script written by Ben Stiller (go figure), Etan Cohen (not to be confused with Ethan Cohen), and Justin Theroux (the lucky b*****d who went out with Jennifer Aniston). They have an ear for dialogue and a somewhat bittersweet attitude toward the movies. This movie references many, many movies, but unlike Doogal, which I reviewed a while back, the references actually have insight and are not just for a cheap laugh. There is, even, small talk that references and satirizes movie trends and even the DVD industry. One of my favorite jokes revolves around a fictional film that Ben Stiller’s character made called Simple Jack, a movie about a mentally challenged character, to which Robert Downey, Jr. gives some helpful advice to Ben Stiller. The dialogue is intelligent and rings true because some of the dialogue features the same attitude we reflect about the movies. Of course, you know that if a satire on Hollywood is made, the cruel side of it will be brought in. It is, but it is smart and, once again, rings true.

Also, for a comedy that isn’t a buddy cop film, I was surprised by the well-choreographed action sequences, especially near the end. In fact, I was surprised how graphic this film got at times. There are two really gory moments that may provoke disgust from the viewer. The R rating is well deserved (MPAA, you finally got one right). My only gripe with the film, though, is that the pacing could’ve been a tad bit better, but that is a small complaint for this piercingly sharp comedy.

On a scale of zero to four stars, Tropic Thunder gets a high three and a half stars! By the way, if anyone out there has a copy of Simple Jack, could I borrow it please?

Wrath of the Titans (2012)

Going to see a movie in a theater is, to me, a great pleasure. Going to see a movie in a theater all by yourself is even more of a thrill. You feel a sense of independence, as you choose what candy, food, or beverage you want and, of course, what movie to see. Walking into Wrath of the Titans, in 3D I might add, gave me that experience. Now if the film itself captured the same sense of ecstasy, I'd be in a much better mood, but I press on.

The plot, of what little I can decipher, takes place ten years after the original 2010 remake. Perseus is the beloved demi-god whose wife, Io, is dead, but has a son now. Perseus has chosen to live life as a human, working as a fisherman. One day, however, Zeus informs him that the gods’ powers are fading because of lack of devotion from humans, or some crap like that. At first, Perseus isn’t interested, but then is later informed that he not only has a cousin, Ares, but he and Hades have taken Zeus as captive. Ares is jealous of Perseus because of Perseus' popularity due to the Kraken battle. So, Perseus, along with Queen Andromeda’s army and the demi-god, Agenor, sets out to find the god, Hephaestus, who apparently knows where Ares is, so that Perseus can defeat Ares. 

Confused? Bored? Well, times that by like ten and you get the idea of what the experience is like. 

I, actually, enjoyed the remake of Clash of the Titans. Was it cheesy? Yes. Was the acting and dialogue laughable? Yes. However, I thought it was a fun movie with an engaging story, likeable characters, and some pretty cool action sequences. So, the idea of making a sequel to a remake when the original 1981 film didn’t have a sequel was pretty stupid. However, the trailers got me convinced to go see it. My hopes were high as I handed the lady my gift card, which had $8.50 on it. So, I didn’t have to pay a dime for anything, except my food. Yet, I still feel ripped off.

I thought it was going to be a fun, campy movie like the remake was, because the film starts out that way. The acting is laughably bad. Liam Neeson as Zeus and Ralph Fiennes as Hades are dull, Edgar Ramirez is dull as Ares, and Sam Worthington is bland, as he reprises his role as Perseus, who looks ridiculous with that stupid hairdo. My least favorite actor in the movie was John Bell as Perseus’ son. Apparently, he is an up-and-coming young actor, as he is appearing in two other films this year, Battleship and The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. I don’t know how good he is in those films, which don’t sound good to begin with, but he is utterly wooden in this. Occasionly, he shows emotion, but about 90% of the movie, he looks like someone slipped him some Xanax to get through this film. The dialogue is also laughable. I fear that a drinking game will evolve where you have to take a drink every time someone in this film says, “Brother!” However, at first, I thought that all this would be an advantage to the film, if it went the campy route.

However, the story is boring and incomprehensible. I could barely understand what was going on, to the point where I just didn’t care about anything that was going on. In fact, I barely could pick out a plot in this movie. I think the whole movie was basically made to cash in on the original film and be a spectacle of special effects. It has a running time of 99 minutes and it still feels longer than the original film. The characters are barely developed before the movie begins the action. There are several things in the story that are stupid or don’t make sense, especially one scene near the end (not a spoiler) where Hades revives Zeus. How Hades does it made me groan and cringe.

Also, the editing is very poor. It’s almost as if the director and/or cinematographer was embarrassed of the special effects, because he cuts the action sequences so quickly that you can barely grasp on what’s happening and you can barely see the creature or whatever until like 10 seconds later. To make things even more confusing and murkier, half of the time, the camera gets doused with sand or light, so there is no way to know what’s going on. And the fact that it is predictable, you don’t even care, because if you are a popular, bland, pretentious demi-god, you’ll always win.

Also, it is visually dull. I’m not trying to say the film is cheap, though there are some lava, fire, or dissolving effects that are cheap. What I am saying is that we’ve seen it all before. It’s not innovative or groundbreaking. It’s more like, “Oh yeah. People can do that now.” However, in the 2010 film, the action sequences, while not innovative either, were fun and that scorpion battle had me at the edge of my seat. The only time I was ever on the edge of my seat was when I was trying to comprehend what was going on or when it stupefied me. 

Also, the creatures are pretty ugly. I mean, I understand that’s kind of the point, but the fact that they are exteriorly unappealing distracts you, instead of captivates you. There are, also, two shots where, I swear to God, were only in there for 3D. One was where the Chimera, all of a sudden, opens his mouth and it pops out at the screen. While it was cool, it was also forced and gratuitous. The other shot was with the Cyclops, where he looked down at the screen. Not only was that a cliché you would see on a TV spot for the film, but also I swear that the filmmakers were so lazy, they repeated that same shot.

However, on the positive side, the sets and locations are magnificent. I don’t know how much of it was real and how much was CGI, but they look really authentic. Also, the 3D is much better in this film. The 2010 film’s use of 3D was, I must confess, completely unnecessary. It did nothing to entangle or transport me into that world. This movie’s use of 3D is much more effective. Also, there were a couple of funny moments and even an emotionally strong moment involving Agenor, played by Toby Kebbell. Overall, though, the movie is flat and stupid and it gets worse and worse until the very bloody end.

Rating: A high one-and-a-half stars out of four

The Hunger Games (2012)

I am not an avid science fiction reader. Not to say that I don’t like science fiction books, but I just don’t read it a lot and I don’t love a lot of it. One exception though is the 2008 novel, The Hunger Games. This best-selling Suzanne Collins novel turned out to be very popular with young adults. So much so was that it was on the New York Times list for over 100 consecutive weeks and even spawned two sequels and who could blame them? The novel was bloody, gripping, tense, and complex. It is definitely in my Top 10 favorite books. So, when Hollywood announced a movie was being made based on this book, fans waited eagerly in anticipation and then, on March 23, those loyal fans rushed to see what is probably the most highly anticipated film of 2012. Does it live up to the hype?

Let me start with the plot of the book. It takes place in a post-apocalyptic world in which North America once existed, but has now been separated into the country of Panem that is separated by twelve districts. During the early times of Panem, there was a rebellion against the Capitol, which holds total power over the nation, and a 13^th district was destroyed. Now, Panem is more peaceful, but due to this past rebellion, one boy and one girl from each district between 12 and 18 years old are chosen to participate in the Hunger Games, where they will fight each other until one remains.

The story revolves around a 16 year old named Katniss Everdeen, who resides in District 12 with her sister, Primrose, and her mother, while her father has been killed in a mining accident. During the Reaping, which is the ceremony where the Hunger Games participants are chosen, Katniss’ sister is chosen, but Katniss volunteers to replace her and fight in the Hunger Games along with the male tribute, Peeta Mellark, where complexity and violence ensues. The reason why I told you the overall synopsis of the novel (and I hope I got it right, because if I didn’t, there will be thousands of fans and a few of my friends at my doorstep, greeting me with torches and pitchforks) is because that’s the same plot of the film, as well.

When I saw the trailers for this film, I thought it was going to be good and satisfying to people who love the book, but not anything special. Surprisingly, it is much better than that. The plot, while a tad bit predictable, is engaging and complex like the book. I perceive this story as a comment on our society and how sadistic we can be. We watch violence on television and movies all the time for our own entertainment. This movie takes that ideal to the extreme when the production crew behind these games throws in things that horrify the contestants, but magnetize the audience.

The action sequences and scenes in the Arena, where the Games take place, are exhilarating and director Gary Ross, whose previous films Pleasantville and Seabiscuit have a completely different mood, doesn’t shy away from showing you grisly images. While it doesn’t get too extreme, since the film is rated PG-13, it still gets pretty bloody and graphic. However, unlike other films, the action is plot-driven and the violence is not just people getting killed. It is about survival, fear, and persistence.

The overall look of the film is great. Special effects have been used to great effect here, especially an authentic and amazing-looking Capitol. The set design is massive and phenomenal, especially the room where Caesar Flickerman interviews the tributes that has electronic screens that look that they came right out of Times Square. Some are the sets are props are overly exaggerated, but unlike Happily N’Ever After, they are creative and eye pleasing. They’re like those surreal statues you see at an art museum. Even the costumes are well done. Those training suits look awesome and, for some reason, remind me of something you would see in Tron: Legacy or something. Sometimes, the costumes are just so bizarre and flamboyant that you can’t help to be absorbed by them. The cinematography is very good, as well. Cinematographer Tom Stern finds a way to create various tones that range from bright and lively to dark and bleak.

The cast is uniformly great. Jennifer Lawrence is, of course, the standout of the film. She came off her Oscar nomination for Winter’s Bone and is proving herself as an up-and-coming actress to look out for. When I first heard the idea for a Hunger Games film, I thought they should’ve gotten Saoirse Ronan from City of Ember and Atonement to play Katniss, but am I glad Jennifer Lawrence was picked. She is strong, powerful, and convincing in her role. Josh Hutcherson, proving he is not a child actor anymore, also is convincing as Peeta. He is good as portraying a character that is just as strong, sly, and smart as Katniss, but doesn’t quite believe it himself and the two of them share a romance that is convincing and complex. How much of it does she feel? How much of it does he feel? Is it all an act or real? Also, Liam Hemsworth is, surprisingly, strong in his role as Gale. While I didn’t feel like they gave him enough development, he is still convincing in his role.

However, the supporting cast is, also, great. Professionals like Woody Harrelson, Stanley Tucci, Elizabeth Banks, Donald Sutherland, and even Lenny Kravitz play their parts very well, especially Woody Harrelson and Donald Sutherland. Woody Harrelson as Haymitch, the mentor for Katniss and Peeta, does a great job, not just finding a great balance of being generous and being a jerk, but also at portraying an alcoholic who is funny and yet seems like he has a deep menace that he desperately wants to reveal. Also, Donald Sutherland as President Snow is a lot more laid-back in the movie that I would’ve pictured him. I think that was the right choice, so that his character could maybe go further and become more of a menace in the following movies.

Also, newcomers Willow Shields as Prim and Amandla Stenberg, as Rue, a tribute who forms an alliance with Katniss, are very strong and, once again, convincing and I hope they receive more work. Furthermore, the tributes are all portrayed well, especially Alexander Ludwig as Cato, a bloodthirsty tribute who becomes even deeply disturbed toward the end, and Dayo Okeniyi as Thresh, a tribute in the same district as Rue who really gets to show off his acting abilities in one particular scene.

Finally, since I mentioned that I read the book, I’m sure all of you are asking the same question: how was the movie compared to the book? It’s a close call, but I have to say that the book is better. However, I will say that the movie is about 88% faithful to the book. There are some small changes and some larger ones, some of which kind of rubbed me the wrong way. 

For example, there are dogs that come in near the end of the book and movie and the movie didn’t explain them as well as the book did. Also, an Avox girl who had her tongue snipped off who was present in the book has no scenes in the movie. While I guess it was cut for time, it is rather important to show what happens when people tried to flee the government. 

I’d tell you more changes, but I don’t want to spoil anything. In fact, the only major gripe I have with the film is the shaky cam. There are several sequences where the camera is shaking way too much, to the point where I could barely see what was going on. I understand when action happens, the camera shakes a little, but it shakes so much I am surprised a drunken Michael J. Fox wasn’t shooting those scenes. Regardless, however, this is a satisfying film for any fan of the book and much more, as well. I was engaged for all 2 hours and 22 minutes of The Hunger Games and can’t wait for Catching Fire.

RATING: A high three-and-a-half stars out of four!