Reviews:Sabotage and Noah

62. Sabotage
This movie wasn't what I was expecting, and it ended up being a pleasant surprise. I thought it was going to be a typical fun action film, along the line of Stallone's "Expendables" films. It ended up being a much darker film than I would have predicted, with quite a bit of blood and gore. The trailers I'd seen for the film are the primary reason for the gap between my expectations and reality. They played up the film's lighter aspects and engaged in some flat out deception--in the trailer it appears that Arnold Schwarzenegger's family is kidnapped by a drug cartel and he has to save them, while in the film this is all part of the character's tragic backstory.

Almost every time a trailer gets me to form a false opinion about what a movie is trying to be, it ends in disappointment. This was a rare exception. I admired the film for going places I didn't expect. I knew going in that a plot point involved someone trying to kill off Arnold's team members. I was surprised when they actually started dropping like flies. It was fun going into a film expecting something predictable, but finding myself truly unable to guess what was going to be happening next. Near the film's end a couple of the death scenes had become predictable, but there were a lot of genuinely surprising twists as well. The action, while still over the top, was somewhat grounded in reality by the level of violence it contained.

I'm not sure how well the film would hold up in a second viewing--a few turns in the plot might not make complete sense if I really gave them tons of thought--but the film surprised me by offering more than one typically finds in "team" action movies.

63. Noah
I'm currently helping out in an acting class by filling in for a student's scene partner who dropped the class. The other day I was watching the teacher work with another group on their scene. He was trying to get them to commit to the scene and try things--anything--even if they thought it might not be a good idea. He said that when he sees a piece of theater he would rather it be absolutely terrible than just so-so. At least there's something to respond to. Going to see so many movies over the past several months makes me agree. Some of the worst films I've seen were extremely entertaining because of how bad they were.

"Noah", regrettably, is not terrible. But it's not very good, either. It lies in the dreaded "so-so" range. For a film whose ultimate destination is never in doubt, it is often slow-paced, and none of the many embellishments to the story add much of anything interesting. There are some impressive visuals during the flood scene itself, but they're just that: impressive visuals. I was able to admire them while watching the film, but in a detached manner, as none of the characters were interesting enough for me to really care about what was happening. Some parts of the film are a little strange, but they feel artificial. There's nothing organic or Lynchian about them. For an "epic" film, this was awfully dull.

Reviews: The Grand Budapest Hotel and Muppets: Most Wanted

60. The Grand Budapest Hotel
I felt that this film worked much better as a trailer than as a full-length feature. Movies frequently don't live up to the promise of their trailers. They can appear to be funnier than they actually are, or even make it seem like the film belongs to a different (often more accessible and crowd-friendly) genre than it really does. That wasn't specifically the issue here. The trailer does a decent job of communicating the film's quirky nature and shows off its inventive set pieces. It is not, on the surface, misleading in any way. In the form of a trailer, the wealth of visual creativity on display is fresh and entertaining. The trailer almost functions as a work of art in its own right. The actual film, however, can't maintain such a rapid pace, and it starts to feel stale after a while. It is too self-aware about its own visual style. After visiting several quirky locations, they start to feel obligatory--they're artistically strange for the sole purpose of being artistically strange.

This wouldn't matter if the story itself had grabbed me more. Unfortunately, while not quite boring, it also seemed content to be merely quirky, never meaningful. I liked some of the characters well enough, but not enough to care deeply about what happened in the story. Had the story had more of an impact, the impressive visuals could have supported it and helped the film to stand out. As is, the visuals were forced to stand on their own as the movie's primary attraction, and while they were enough to make for a great trailer, they could not carry the full feature by themselves.

61. Muppets: Most Wanted
I was engaged for the first half, then started to check out when it became clear that the film had played all its cards and was only going to be offering more of the same. It has some catchy songs and manages to get by on its charm for a while before the thin plot and hit-or-miss celebrity cameos start to become repetitive.

I did enjoy Ricky Gervais' performance. Even without his usual sidearm of hilariously inappropriate humor to rely upon, he still managed to be entertaining. He fully committed to all of his scenes, very important considering that most of them involved him playing opposite only puppets.

Lots of "kids' films" attempt to either tell a universal story that can be enjoyed by all ages, or to put in a second level of humor, more adult jokes that kids will not notice, let alone understand. "Muppets: Most Wanted" tries to do both to a degree, but doesn't pull off either as well as it could have.

Reviews: The Shawshank Redemption and Bad Words

58. The Shawshank Redemption
I don't know how long it had been since I'd seen this before catching the recent "Classic Films" screening. Several years, at least. It's been one of my favorite movies for a long time, but there were stretches in the past where I would watch it almost once a day, so taking a long break from the material was probably a good idea.

It was fun to see the film again, on the big screen, no less. It still holds up well and boasts some great performances. Its use of voiceover narration throughout the film is effective and warranted, a rarity in film, though it is likely what inspired filmmakers to give Morgan Freeman long passages of narration in just about every future film he has appeared in, whether it was necessary in those cases or not. My tastes in film and my ability to analyze them have grown since my previous viewing, so I did pick up on a few issues I hadn't noticed before. It can be argued that the black and white lens through which the film views many of its characters is a bit simplistic. Most all of the convicts are good people, except those the film needs to be bad, while the warden is unequivocally a "bad guy" with next to nothing in the way of redeeming qualities. This simplicity doesn't bother me too much, as it serves the story that the film is interested in telling, but it is hard to completely discount the criticism. Would it have been interesting to see Morgan Freeman's character still wrestling with some demons from his past over the course of the film, instead of starting out as a pretty clear cut good guy? Yes, it probably would have, but that's not the story the film is trying to tell, and would likely have added to the run time.

About a year ago, the film was left off Entertainment Weekly's list of the 100 best movies ever made, a decision that many took issue with. I for one think that it definitely deserved a place on the list. Making a movie set almost completely inside a prison into a beloved crowd pleaser is no easy task. On the other hand, considering that the list included the massively overrated final "Lord of the Rings" film and ranked it above films like "On the Waterfront" and "Lawrence of Arabia", maybe being left off entirely was an honor.

59. Bad Words
Maybe not a very memorable film (not many straight comedies are, for me, anyway), but very funny. I have always enjoyed dark, irreverent humor, and this film did not disappoint.

The film's most impressive feat is that it manages to tell its story without ever ceasing to be funny or losing that sense of irreverence. Most comedies with antiheroes fail in the third act when it becomes necessary to reveal the character's inner humanity and demonstrate what he has learned over the course of the film (all together now: "Awww..."). "Bad Words" lets us know from very early on that the main character has some kind of secret agenda in entering himself in a kids' spelling bee. This lets us know that there is a deeper level to the character, and makes later revelations about him feel natural, not forced into the film like they often would be. Even when he decides to act selflessly in the film's climax, the film manages to keep things fresh and original. His attempt is rebuffed by the very kid he's trying to help, and they end up getting into a fight over it. In most comedies like this, the character's decision to finally do something selfless would be the end of the dramatic arc, but here he has to struggle to succeed in doing the right thing, even after deciding to do it. It was incredibly refreshing to see a film manage to hit all the beats that are expected in this type of movie while still maintaining its irreverent edge.

Reviews: God's Not Dead and Divergent

56. God's Not Dead
I was lucky enough to catch a sparsely attended screening of this. I've become wary of seeing religious-themed films with large audiences after my experience with "Son of God". It seems that there are always some people who can't get it through their heads that they're  not at their church--they're in a movie theater, and it's not appropriate to be shouting "Amen!" or to talk back to the film in general. One woman during "Son of God" felt to the need to pipe up with "That's right!" every other time Jesus opened his mouth. Fortunately, at a Thursday night showing of "God's Not Dead", there was only one other group in the theater, sitting near the back, and they mostly managed to keep quiet.

Overall, "God's Not Dead" is not a great film. It is often preachy, no surprise given its subject matter, and it frequently falls into cliché and relies too much on coincidence. The main storyline is the strongest, about a college freshman tasked with arguing in favor of the existence of God before his philosophy class after refusing his professor's request to write the film's title on a piece of paper. The film would have been better if it had stuck to just the characters in this storyline, but instead the film decided to also tell several other stories (a Muslim girl who has secretly become Christian, a reporter dealing with a cancer diagnosis, and old woman going senile in a nursing home, etc.) all of which weave together, sharing characters. All of these storylines feel artificial. They are shoehorned into the film to get a point across, and never take an unexpected turn.

The main story, while never in doubt as to its destination, manages to manufacture at least a bit of genuine drama. Much of this is thanks to Kevin Sorbo as the philosophy professor, who is the only character in the film with any layers. As a kid I was a fan of him in "Hercules", so it was fun to see him on screen here. The film has nothing new to say about the debate between atheism and religion, but it does often present compelling arguments for both sides (though the film's ultimate stance on the issue is clear). It's never a particularly good film, and it has some huge problems, but it could have been worse.

57. Divergent
"Divergent" is often a clunky exercise in going through the motions of telling its story, but I couldn't help but like it for some massive improvements it made to the book.

First, the problems. Much like "Vampire Academy", the film relies too much on exposition via voiceover at the very beginning. This may be the fastest way to get information across about the world of the film, but giving the audience a lecture is not the best way to get things started. It would have been quite simple to convey everything via dialogue. In fact, I would have jettisoned voiceover narration from the film entirely. I only remember it from the beginning and end of the film, and found it unnecessary in both cases.

The film has no distinct visual style, either. Most of the settings are generic and could be from any number of dystopian or science-fiction films. There's nothing original about it. The plot itself also lacks much of anything to set it apart for much of the film. There are cases where, if an original film, certain characters would likely have been combined, making for fewer, but more developed supporting characters. Being based on a book, however, the film feels the need to feature most of the novel's characters. Given the number of characters and the limited running time, we never get to know them most of them.

Where the film excelled, however, was that it actually told a complete story. My major complaint with the book was that it felt like a prologue with no resolution. While the film's ultimate ending is similar to the book's and leaves the door open for the sequels, many aspects of the ending leading up to this are changed. Kate Winslet's character has much more of a presence in the film than she does in the novel. She is set up as the antagonist early on. She also has a significantly beefed up role in the climax, personally fighting with the lead characters mentally and physically. This allows their defeat of her (for now at least) to feel like a genuine victory, and a good place to end the film. Leaving her character out the action for much of the book's ending made for a climax that meandered to its conclusion. The film has been building to a confrontation with her all along and provides one, making for a satisfying ending. There may not have been anything truly original about "Divergent", but I was quite impressed by its ability to make a decent film out of a dull book.

Reviews: The Single Mom's Club and Veronica Mars

54. The Single Moms Club
I was not looking forward to seeing this movie. I wasn't dreading the content of the film itself. Rather, as I am clearly not a part of the film's intended demographic, I was pretty sure I'd be getting some strange looks going to see it alone. I ended up going to an early afternoon weekday showing and lucked out. There were only six other people in the theatre.

The film is decent for much of its runtime, but in no way transcendent (not that I believe it tries to be). The various story threads tend to be hit or miss. This is to be expected when you have five main characters, each with their own story arc--some will connect better than others. The film is at its best when it is content to be a gentle comedy. It has some reasonably funny lines, although nothing truly hilarious.

The film lost me near the end, when it tried to get too serious. A lot of comedies fall victim to this. When they try to get dramatic and communicate the film's message, they do it in a ham-fisted manner and (even worse) forget to be funny. Many elements throughout the film were clichéd, but near the end it got truly ridiculous, with events occurring solely for the sake of drama. Even if it hadn't fallen apart at the end, there are plenty of movies that have done a better job with similar material. There's really no reason this needed to be made.

55. Veronica Mars
I have never seen an episode of the television show this movie follows (if it were on Netflix instead of Amazon, I might have gotten around to it). I still found the film to be fairly accessible. While I'm sure I would have gotten more out of it if I'd seen the series beforehand, I was never confused due to lack of information. The film started with a brief introductory voiceover played over what I assume were clips from the series. It's a clunky way to take care of the exposition (finding a way to eloquently convey said information in dialogue or action would have been ideal), but it doesn't sink the film, since it's over and done with so quickly.

There were a few jokes, also towards the beginning, that I felt relied too heavily on breaking the fourth wall. They were funny enough, but they also pulled me out of the film's world, never a good thing. On the whole, however, I enjoyed the film. Much of the dialogue was clever and fast paced. The storyline had its share of twists, making for a fun ride. Again, I'm sure I would have gotten more out of the film if I'd seen the original series. There would be an extra sense of excitement in seeing the characters onscreen again, reuniting and interacting. Even without that, I still found this to be a fun, enjoyable movie. I'm enjoying the trend of television shows seeing a second life after cancellation (I'm especially looking forward to the return of "24"). I hope that this film is successful and paves the way for similar such projects. A "Twin Peaks" revival is at the top of my wishlist.

Reviews: Mr. Peabodyand Sherman and Need for Speed

52. Mr. Peabody and Sherman
I had a lot of fun with this movie. It offers pure escapism--a quick moving plot with plenty of jokes that never takes itself too seriously. The time-travelling plot never stays in one place for too long, quickly and efficiently mining each place and time period for its comedic value before moving on to the next. The movie features appearances from historical figures as diverse as Robespierre, Leonardo da Vinci, King Tut, Agamemnon, and Bill Clinton. Some of the comedy comes from the real life aspects of these characters, making it even funnier for those who get the joke.

The movie does have the obligatory emotional storyline alongside the main plot. It's handled fairly well; the emotional beats are spread out and it doesn't feel shoehorned into the plot like it would in many other animated films. Its resolution near the end is perhaps a bit too heavy handed, but that's a minor quibble, and is made up for by the humor that results. The film is high quality family entertainment.

53. Need for Speed
I have mixed feelings about this film. It started off on shaky ground and eventually got better, but it had one major issue that I was never able to get past.

The film's first problem was that it took too long to get started. It spends an awful lot of time setting up the characters and situation before jumping to a couple years later and moving into the bulk of the story. Most films featuring such a time jump early on would find a way to set everything up in a fast-paced opening sequence. "Need for Speed" takes about half an hour or so to set everything up, during which we have two car racing scenes and lots of unnecessary exposition. I was getting bored waiting for the film to really start.

Fortunately, once the film finally does get going, it gets going pretty well. The characters are given just enough motivation to justify a plot that features several inventively staged car chases. It's impressive how each manages to feel fresh, given that there are so many of them. The film also adds the element of a ticking clock, ratcheting up the tension. As long as you can suspend disbelief, there's a lot of fun to be had during most of the film.

This brings me to the major problem with the film, the one I just could not get past. The main character's motivation throughout the film is to get revenge for a friend who was killed during one of the races during the film's setup. Even putting aside the fact that said friend was really annoying and I would have shaken the bad guy's hand for ensuring I didn't have to put with him for the full movie, I just couldn't muster any sympathy. During the racing scene, all three drivers, the ill-fated friend included, are shown to be enjoying themselves, having a blast. This is despite the fact that their antics cause several innocent motorists to crash into each other or run off the road. I wonder if any of these people were injured. The friend clearly didn't. He just kept driving and laughing. So I found it really hard to care that something bad happened to him during an illegal street race that he was a willing participant in, when he didn't spare a thought for any of the innocent people who may have been hurt. Somehow the film expects us to only view the "bad guy" as responsible for what happened. While I did enjoy the bulk of the film, this left a bad taste in my mouth, and made it impossible for me to ever be entirely on the hero's side.

Reviews: 300: Rise of an Empire and The Wind Rises

50. 300: Rise of an Empire
As I said in my previous post, when I finally got to see this film in its entirety, it was at a large format, 3-D screening. Having seen the first chunk of the film in 2-D, I was able to see the difference the third dimension had on the film. It wasn't the best 3-D I've ever seen. I would have appreciated a little more depth in some places, but there were a couple times when, looking down, the 3-D created the illusion of great height very well. One shot fairly early on even got my stomach to drop slightly. The 3-D was also used very well in some of the naval battles and, of course, served to highlight the over the top visual style of the film, making blood appear to splash in all directions.

That visual style is by definition, stylistic, and clearly has its own voice. It looks cool on screen and does its job, but it may be a rare case where something that is "stylistic" is not "artistic". This is not a serious criticism, just something I picked up on. I got the sense that the stylized action and violence in the film was there solely for the purpose of looking cool. Often when a film has such stylized violent visuals, there is something beautifully artistic about those visuals as well (I'm thinking of the Crazy 88 fight scene in "Kill Bill"), but I don't feel that was the case here. This mimics my overall impression of the film as a whole. I don't think it is technically a very good film, but it was still entertaining.

51. The Wind Rises
I never became fully invested in this film. In fact, it all seemed kind of pointless to me. It had an aimless storyline that seemed to be building toward something that it never reached. At a little over two hours, the film's entire runtime feels like a prologue, followed by a strange dream/flashforward that functions as an epilogue.

The film takes place in Japan before World War II, and there are references made to Hitler and the possible coming conflict, but nothing ever materializes from this. It instead deals with the main character's life and personal problems over the span of several years, but its not presented in a way grand enough to feel that it justified a cinematic portrayal.

I also was not a fan of some of the English dubbing. Many of the roles are done by reasonably well known actors. Some acquit themselves well, but others seem to be phoning it in, as if they did their dialogue recording in the same session as some television commercial voiceover work. It's possible that I would enjoy the film more if I saw it a second time, knowing what to expect, but I have no interest.

A Unique Way to Free Tickets

On March 8th, I used my Movie Pass to go to an evening showing of "300: Rise of an Empire" at Arundel Mills Mall (my review will be coming in my next update). I'm pretty sure that I go to this theatre over fifty percent of the time that I use my pass. It's relatively close by, and they have more screens than any other local theater (24) which gives me a large selection of films and showtimes to pick from. This film was released in 3-D, and was showing in the theatre's XD auditorium (a similar and competing format to IMAX), but since my pass only pays for 2-D movies, I attended a regular showing.

About forty five minutes or so into the movie, an employee came running into the theatre and announced that there had been an emergency and we had to leave. I was near the front of the theater, so I got out quickly and then, since there was nothing else to do, got in my car and drove home. On the news we saw that someone had set off fireworks in another one of the theaters and that it had been reported to the police as shots fired.

That night I got an email from a friend I'd made doing "Once Upon a Mattress" suggesting that we try to catch a movie soon. We'd talked about movies a lot while doing the play, and he had even bought his Mom a Movie Pass after hearing about it from me. We made plans to catch the XD 3-D showing of "300" that Monday. I was pretty confident they'd let me trade in my ticket stub from the interrupted movie for a better ticket.

On Monday, I arrived early to get to the Guest Services desk, and explained the situation. I knew they wouldn't take me up on it, but I offered to pay the difference in cost between the ticket from Saturday and the ticket with the extra XD and 3-D charges. Of course, they let me have the special ticket for free, but they also gave me a free ticket for my friend. I have to say that I was genuinely impressed by the display of customer service; I did not expect the second free ticket. I found it funny that a ticket I didn't even have to pay for to begin with ended up earning me two more expensive tickets. I hope this doesn't happen again, but it did make for an interesting (and lucrative) series of events.

Reviews: Son of God and Rear Window

48. Son of God
I haven't seen "The Bible" miniseries from which this film was constructed (apparently some scenes from the series were not in the film and vice versa). Nevertheless, the film's lack of focus made it easy to see that it had been cobbled together from preexisting footage. There were even multiple occasions where strangely timed fades to black seemed designed to segue into commerical breaks.

Making a movie about Jesus interesting is a daunting task. Most of the best regarded films that tackle the subject use him as only a peripheral character ("Ben-Hur") or feature a provocative new angle from which to approach the story ("The Last Temptation of Christ"). While the latter film was met with much controversy over the way it chose to depict Jesus and his story, it was not boring. "Son of God" was boring. Incredibly so. After briefly covering his birth, the first half of the film is basically Jesus' Greatest Hits, as he goes around collecting followers and performing miracles. There is no real sense of progression and, even worse, there is no sense of purpose. Why is Jesus gathering disciples? The film never tells us. And why is he successful? As portrayed, he has an excessive, almost lobotomized, calmness to his voice no matter the situation. He has no sense of charisma, most certainly not enough to inspire any followers.

The second half of the film is the lead up to the crucifixion and the event itself. This also runs on for too long. Everyone who goes to see this film already knows the story. "Son of God" has nothing new to say--it is just a bland retelling, going through the motions in obligatory fashion.

49. Rear Window
Another film, like "On the Waterfront", that I'm not going to spend tons of time discussing, as most everything that is to be said about the film already has been.

I hadn't seen "Rear Window" in several years before catching this screening, and I really had a lot of fun with it. One of its best aspects is that it was interesting and held my attention even before the "real story" began. The film spends a lot of time with set-up, establishing not only the major characters that we as the audience spend our time with, but also the lives of all the people James Stewart's character spends his days watching (incidentally, the voyeuristic appeal of the film helps the audience identify with the lead character, as we join him in his spying). We know that, this being a Hitchcock movie, something sinister will eventually happen, but the characters and their activities are more than enough to maintain interest until that inevitability occurs. And when it does, the time spent getting to know the characters pays off, as we are truly invested in their fates, raising the tension of the climactic scenes.

Reviews: Non-Stop and Repentance

46. Non-Stop
A solid, entertaining film. Movies like this have to walk a line between delivering the expected beats of the action/thriller genre and being original enough so that it doesn't feel like a pointless retread. It's harder than it sounds--juggling the familiar with the unfamiliar. Give the audience exactly what they expect and there's no real drama. Change things up too much, and the film might not even fit its supposed genre anymore, making the viewer feel cheated. There's never really any doubt as to where the story will go in "Non-Stop", at least in a general sense. But it has a few nice twists and turns along the way that breathe life into the premise. That's really all one can ask from a movie like this: Give us what we're expecting, but throw in a few surprises before we get there.

This film also continues the "action star" phase of Liam Neeson's career. Neeson is such a good actor in general that he has the gravitas to elevate typical action fare above its genre. Having honed his dramatic acting for decades, he delivers characters who are more grounded than those typically seen in this type of film. He depends on his earnestness and stoic determination to defeat the bad guys, and doesn't need cheesy one-liners to do it. This makes all of his characters more realistic and relatable.

47. Repentance
Forest Whitaker delivers a very good, unsettling performance in this film. He is filled with manic energy in his first appearance, but keeps it bottled in, giving the impression that the could (and the expectation that eventually he will) explode. His character has several layers that are gradually revealed throughout the film, and his performance hints at them in advance, but never spoils them.

Unfortunately, his performance is the only good thing about the film. The plot, although it does progress, has no sense of progression. Some events seem to occur based on the whim of the screenwriter, not because they would logically follow the preceding events. The film's other major problem is that none of the characters are particularly likeable. I didn't care about them, and didn't care what happened to them. In a film that derives much of its drama from putting its characters in dangerous situations, that is unacceptable. Whitaker was often fun to watch, but the film itself was not.

Reviews: On the Waterfront and Highway

44. On the Waterfront
I sometimes have trouble coming up with much to say about classic films that I see in theatres. It's not that I don't have an opinion--I usually do, and, if the word "classic" has been applied appropriately, that opinion is usually positive. It's just that when a film is well known and has been out for a long time (since 1954 in the case of "On the Waterfront"), there's not much left that can be added to the conversation. If the film were bad, I'd have something interesting to say as I attempted to refute the reasons it's held in such high esteem.

"On the Waterfront", of course, is not bad. It is a very good film, and is deservedly a classic. Marlon Brando's performance is incredible. While the film may feel a little slow during the beginning, this is not a bad thing. It allows the audience a chance to get to know the characters, and allows the film's tension and pace to build throughout. If this were a new release, I would be spending a lot of time talking about everything that was great about it, but others have beaten me to that.

45. Highway
The second foreign film I have seen in theatres this year, "Highway" is from India. I still experience a bit of trepidation before going into most foreign films. I have no problem with reading subtitles, and I don't really think I'm going to be bored, but there's a bit of fear that if I am bored, I'm going to be really bored. Fortunately, "Highway" managed to keep me engaged for most of its runtime. It dragged a bit near the end, but not horribly so.

The plot generally worked. The film might as well have been called "Stockholm Syndrome: The Movie", as it primarily concerns a rich girl and her kidnapper falling in love. To its credit, the film takes this central relationship seriously and it works for the most part, but does feel a bit contrived in some places. We get a sense from the beginning that the girl is not completely happy with the life that she's been living with her family, and further revelations from her feel organic. Partway through the film, however, when the kidnapper hints at traumatic events from his own past, it feels a bit convenient. If some hints had been thrown in earlier, the films machinations to let the two damaged people find happiness with each other would have been less transparent.

There are several instances where songs start to play on the soundtrack, and the film is edited almost like a music video. In one such instance, a character even starts singing along. These moments would have pulled me out of most typical American films, but there's something about this being a foreign film that helps it get away with these scenes. I can accept them as a stylistic flourish that I'm simply not used to seeing, and they actually piqued my interest and were somewhat fascinating in their own right. Overall, the film combined elements and cinematic techniques that are both familiar and unfamiliar to me. It was quite good.

Reviews: 3 Days to Kill and In Secret

42. 3 Days to Kill
I enjoyed myself well enough with this film--it was a fun way to kill an hour and a half, but that's not to say that it brought anything new to the table or was especially well done.

The film's major problem is a lack of focus. It tries to juggle too many plot threads at once. The main character spends the film simultaneously working to rebuild a relationship with his wife and daughter, fighting off an illness that will kill him in a matter of months, getting used to a working relationship with his new handler/partner, and hunting down The Big Bad Guy. And, oh yeah, he also has squatters living in his apartment, including a woman about to give birth. A better film could weave these various threads into a frantic tapestry, but "3 Days to Kill" merely jumps between the various plotlines with no real sense of focus.

Some moments in the film worked better than others, and there were some comedic moments, but I frequently got the sense that the film thought these moments were more clever than they really are. The action scenes were standard, nothing spectacular. Sometimes a film's shortcomings can be overlooked if the action scenes are frequent and good enough that film can be excused as "just trying to be entertaining" ("Pompeii" is a good example). While I was somewhat entertained by "3 Days to Kill", it did not reach this threshold and is, in truth, not a particularly good film.

43. In Secret
I liked certain elements of this film quite a bit, but they never completely congealed into a whole.

The first half of the film executed its premise very well, even if it was nothing original. It features a woman trapped in a loveless marriage (at least on her part) who falls in love with another man. They then plot to murder her husband so they can be together. I've seen the general concept done before--forbidden love leading to murderous acts, but it is done effectively here. The audience is genuinely made to pity the character of Terese, not just because of her unhappy marriage, but because of the series of circumstances, beginning when she was a girl, that led to her being trapped in it. Her attraction to a friend of her husband's and the beginning of their affair are believable. Some of these early love scenes are impressively erotic, especially considering the very small amounts of nudity in the film.

Once Terese and her lover have successfully gotten rid of her husband, things start to fall apart for them. Ironically, this is where things start to fall apart for the film as well. The growing distrust that builds between the characters feels obligatory, like watching a morality play who's purpose is to show that evil deeds are always punished. The rising tension felt like it was taking place for its own sake, rather than as the organic result of the characters and their actions. The ending it built to felt unbelievable to me on a variety of levels. One thing I did enjoy during the latter half of the film, however, was that the actual killing of Terese's husband is not shown where it chronologically occurs in the film. It is used as a flashback much later, when things between Terese and her new lover are at their worst. This was an effective way to illustrate the nature of the secret the two lovers had been keeping between themselves, and it would have been even more effective had the growing animosity between them felt genuine.

Reviews: The Attorney and Pompeii

40. The Attorney
The first foreign film I used my Movie Pass to see (I have since seen one more), I didn't really go into "The Attorney" with much of an idea what to expect. Based on the beginning of a very brief synopsis and the poster, I was expecting a comedy. The first part of the film seemed to confirm this--it was never hysterical, but seemed to be a gently comedic, inoffensive film. Around a quarter of the way through, however, it turned into a serious legal drama. It was an interesting way to set up the film and let the audience get to know the major characters. The dramatic portions get pretty dark, and these moments have more impact when compared the light-hearted scenes that began the film.

The main story is nothing that hasn't been done before, at least in its broad strokes. It's a standard courtroom drama that pits the one attorney willing to fight for the case against incredibly powerful, corrupt government officials. It handles this story well, but doesn't stand out as drastically different from other courtroom dramas I've seen, aside from the fact that it's in Korean. Still, it is a good film, with its most original feature being the switch from comedy to drama.

41. Pompeii
"Pompeii" got mostly terrible reviews, and I went into it expecting the worst. As it turned out, I enjoyed the movie quite a lot. Yes, it's kind of cheesy and the love story is absolutely ridiculous, but I don't think this is entirely unintentional. I read some criticism online that referred to Kiefer Sutherland's performance as the villain as terrible. I disagree. I think he's being deliberately bad, and there is a difference. It's not the biggest scenery chewing performance of all time, but he's clearly having a good time and not taking the film too seriously. This is true of the whole film in general: it doesn't take itself too seriously, and is thus able to just concentrate on being silly and showing the audience a good time, even before Mount Vesuvius erupts.

As I said before, the love story is ridiculous. The whole relationship between the two leads is built on wistful glances from afar--they barely exchange two words until over halfway into the film. But the film knows the relationship is just an excuse to set up frantic action scenes near the climax, and it doesn't expect us to really invest emotionally in the lovers' plight. "Pompeii" acquits itself especially well when compared to the Roland Emmerich school of disaster films ("The Day After Tomorrow", "2012"). In those movies, you get the big, well done disaster scenes you came for, but you also have to deal with bloated runtimes of over two hours, with too much time spent trying (and failing) to tug at your emotions. "Pompeii" doesn't bother wasting time with any of that. It tells enough story to set up a few well choreographed gladiator battles before letting the volcano do its thing. It then has the requisite visually impressive disaster sequences, with a few more fights and a chase scene thrown in for good measure. Before these can become too repetitive, it has the good sense to end, coming in at a brisk 104 minutes. All in all, a pretty fun movie.

Endless Love and Winter's Tale

I'm excited to finally be back to writing new movie reviews.

38. Endless Love
This was a terrible movie. A hilariously, ridiculously terrible movie. It was like watching three seasons of a bad prime-time soap opera crammed into 103 minutes. I laughed several times, but never in ways the filmmakers would have wanted.

Nothing in the film feels genuine. Character motivations are clichéd. Plot twists can be seen coming from miles away. They aren't even really twists, not when we've seen them done many times before.

My earlier comparison is what I just can't get over regarding this film. It really does feel like someone has edited the "greatest hits" from a television soap opera into a movie. On television, though, the story (while still bad) would have had time to breathe. Instead, the film rushes from one overly dramatic cliché to the next. It's almost exhilarating in its badness. Still, one gets the impression that the actors and filmmakers were trying to make a good film. If they had actually recognized how bad the film was going to be and embraced it, we could have had a new classic on our hands--the worst (or best) so bad it's good movie ever. As is, it's still a contender.

39. Winter's Tale
I was looking forward to this movie based on its trailer. It didn't manage to live up to my expectations--I would probably rate it about a 'C'. Had it been edited differently, however, I think it could have been a solid 'B'.

The film seemed, in previews, to be a mostly simple love story, but with a bit of a fantastical element to it (after all, it somehow spans roughly a century). In reality, the movie is much more complicated, unnecessarily so. It involved demons, and angels, and attempts by the former to prevent miracles from taking place. If the movie wanted to allude to some of this, that would be fine, but it is much too "in your face" with it all. A wise, magical horse showing up to help the main character is okay. Learning that it is literally a guardian angel takes away any sense of whimsy or mystery.

This lack of mystery is my main issue with the film's editing. With the exception of the very beginning, the film mostly takes place in sequence, first in the early 1900s, then, after a time jump, in the present day. I think that these two sequences should have been intercut. In the beginning of the present day sequence, Colin Farrell's character is even suffering from amnesia. That's the perfect place for the movie to begin. It would be a more effective way of drawing the viewer in. We would be going on a journey of discovery with the character instead of, two-thirds through the film, waiting for him to remember what we already know. There are a few places during the modern day scenes that would have made for good moments to put in lengthy flashbacks. By showing the story's events in chronological order, the film feels less like a unified whole. Instead, it feels like two distinct sections, neither with a great payoff. I still don't think "Winter's Tale" would have been a great movie if it had been more skillfully edited, but it could have been a good one.

Goals for March

1. Watch at least 10 different movies in the theatre. Again, this is a goal I'll probably give myself and exceed every month.

2. Complete a first draft of a screenplay. I think I've done enough of my pre-writing to get to the point where I can start my actual writing. It may be pretty rough, but the important thing is getting the script down on paper. Then I can really start messing around with and improving it.

3. Clean my room. It's a mess. Has been for a while. That needs to change.

After several non movie-related posts, it's finally time to get back to my mini reviews in my next post.

February Goals Wrap-Up

With February just behind us, it's time to take a look back at my goals for the month.

1. Watch at least 10 different movies in the theatre. I think this will be a goal I give myself every month--one that will be easy to attain, but that will ensure I keep regularly using my Movie Pass. I ended up surpassing this goal, seeing 16 different movies in theatres (not counting the Best Picture nominees).

2. Go to the gym every day. I met this goal, and on one occasion even ended up going twice in one day. We had a big snow storm coming in, and I wasn't certain I would be able to get out of the house and to the gym the next day, so I waited until just after Midnight to go. As it turned out, I was able to get out the next day, so I ended up going again.

3. Read two books. As previously discussed, I read both "Divergent" and "Dr. Sleep".

4. Do more screenplay prep work. I didn't end up writing anything new down, but I've given my ideas some more thought and come up with some new ones. I should be ready to start writing, so I consider this goal a success.