Insidious: Chapter 2

Insidious: Chapter 2 picks up right where the first one left off.  As in literally the minute after the first movie's ending.  There's an extremely brief recap of events, but if you're wanting to watch the sequel and haven't seen the original, go watch it.

Now that you've watched the first movie, we can get into Chapter 2.  The plot is basic sequel fare.  The same story as the first but bigger.  The family is still dealing with possession and ghosts.  There's also another climatic rescue mission into the Further.

Insidious 2 is a much more consistent film than the original.  This is both a good thing and a bad thing.  It's good in that the film never suffers from tonal issues in the third act like the first movie.  But this new film also lacks the gleeful insanity of the first movie's climax. 

 

Both of the Insidious films are ridiculously low budget ($1.5 million for the first and $5 million for the sequel), but this has never hindered the writing/directing team of James Wan and Leigh Whannell.  In fact, the two movies of theirs that have $20 million budgets are their worst movies (I still like Dead Silence though).  But Insidious 2 lacks the charm of low budget horror.  In the first movie, the Further is just a black room and people in costumes jump out at the main character and make scary noises.  It's cheap and wacky and, most importantly, fun.  In the sequel, it feels as if the director's experience with The Conjuring (great movie) stripped Insidious of its fun.  The Conjuring is by no means big budget ($20 million) but that's a lot for a filmmaker like James Wan.  He was able to make a more refined picture.  When he came back to Insidious, he still wanted a refined, Hollywood horror film.  The result is a movie that looks great for its budget, but fails to have that little something extra that makes it stand out.

 

It is a creepy movie though and has some really good scares.  Wan is a master of creating a spooky atmosphere.  There's a constant sense of dread that permeates the film.  Nothing keeps you on edge like the feeling that anything could happen at anytime.  There's a scene where Barbara Hershey wanders through the house turning on the lights and the scene gets scarier with every light that she turns on.  It's a total subversion of the fear of the dark.  Wan creates moments where the lights create unnerving shadows and we start wondering whether we really want to see what's out there in the dark.  It's genius-level filmmaking.

 

The cast is superb.  Patrick Wilson is always great.  Rose Byrne gets to take a more central role in the sequel and that only helps the film.  Barbara Hershey is also excellent.  Hershey and Byrne are especially good at conveying fear and that helps drive the sense of danger.  The really great new castings in Insidious 2 are the younger versions of Barbara Hershey and Lin Shaye.  Shaye's Elise is portrayed by Lindsay Seim, who hasn't really been in anything noteworthy but the resemblance is uncanny.  For Barbara Hershey, they cast Jocelin Donahue.  When I watched her in The House of the Devil (available on Netflix and Hulu Plus), all I could think was, "This gal looks like a young Barbara Hershey."  Seems like I wasn't the only one who thought that.

 

Insidious: Chapter 2 is worth a watch.  It's not the strongest horror film, but it's better than most mainstream stuff.  I really liked how it feels like a conglomeration of classic horror films.  You'll find traces of The Exorcist, Poltergeist, The Shining, and The Amityville Horror (for starters) all over this movie.  So, turn off the lights (for maximum effect) and fire up the TV.  This movie will give you some quality scares but it won't stay with you.

 

6 out of 10

Elysium

The words "from the director of District 9" on a poster or in a trailer made me crazy excited.  I am a huge fan of District 9.  But writer/director Neill Blomkamp's sophomore effort is very disappointing.  That's not to say it's a bad movie.  It's one of the best looking action films of the year, but that can be said of Man of Steel too.  So, where did Elysium go wrong?

 

For starters, the heavy handed political message.  District 9 is a movie wherein the treatment of alien creatures in South Africa mirrors the treatments of blacks under apartheid.  It's not what the movie is about, but it gives some weight to a movie that is otherwise just an alien and a bureaucrat reenacting The Defiant Ones.  George Romero's original zombie trilogy also uses social commentary to elevate simple genre fare and those films became enduring classics.  But with Elysium, the social commentary is the entire point and it's not subtle. 

 

People don't like to be preached to.  They especially don't like to be preached to during a big-budget, summer blockbuster.  Another problem is that foreigners shouldn't tackle American domestic issues.  There are exceptions but unless you've really got a grasp on the U.S.A., you come off looking like a jerk.  Blomkamp is from South Africa, and if he wanted to make a movie that criticized America's involvement in the Middle East or our tendency to impose our culture and beliefs on other countries or how our struggling economy affects the world, that would be great.  You see, that stuff all involves America's interactions with others.  A movie director from another continent shouldn't be telling audiences how Americans should be running their country and living their lives.  And it's not so much that Blomkamp isn't American that wrecks his story/sermon.  It's that he constantly tries to shove some unpopular ideas down your throat.  That's why subtlety is needed. 

 

There's a movie that came out last year called Killing Them Softly.  It's an amazing film written and directed by an Australian, Andrew Dominik.  Killing Them Softly tackles capitalism in respect to the recent American recession.  Dominik uses the tale of mafia hitmen as an allegory for the evils of capitalism.  It's up to you whether it's the specific capitalists who precipitated the recession who're evil or the entire capitalist system, but the point is that the movie is first and foremost a story about hitmen.  Elysium is first and foremost about the gulf between the haves and have-nots, it's about the evils of restricting immigration, and it's about the need for universal health care.  If you disagree with any or all of those things, then Elysium will alienate you.  If you do agree with any of those things, then you'll be left wondering what happened to the plot.

 

And there is a plot.  It's just thin.  In the future, the rich live on a space station orbiting Earth called "Elysium."  Matt Damon is a factory worker who is exposed to radiation and has only a few days to live.  He makes a deal with a gang/poverty insurgents to get them access to Elysium in exchange for a metal framework that enhances his body.  His attempts to gain access to Elysium and the healing beds that the rich own are thwarted by the head of Elysium's security and her mercenaries.  This results in lots of explosions and bleeding heart pontification.

 

There is a lot of good stuff going on in Elysium though.  I'm not saying that Neill Blomkamp is a one-hit wonder.  Elysium has visual effects that are stunning.  Everything is seamless.  People, props, amazing art direction, practical effects, and CGI all meld together to create a virtually flawless looking movie.  It's the writing that is lacking.  Blomkamp is super talented and I think it would be good for him to direct someone else's script.  I think he would elevate any material he's given and maybe give him a chance to really work out his next original work.

 

I do recommend it, but just barely.  The effects are worth the price alone.  But just be prepared for a very preachy movie about some very divisive issues.  This isn't a movie to watch around obnoxiously out spoken friends with strong political views either (regardless of party affiliation).  Maybe just watch it by yourself.

 

6 out of 10.

Kick-Ass 2

I love Kick-Ass so much!  It's anarchic and fun and deliriously violent.  It captures enough of the reality of what being a real-life superhero would be like while seamlessly incorporating the ridiculously over-the-top nature of comic books.  Kick-Ass is one of the best comic book movies ever made.  Kick-Ass 2 is not.

 

The sequel picks up four years after the first movie (I base this on Mindy/Hit Girl being 11 in the first movie and 15 in the sequel).  Dave has retired from being Kick-Ass.  He finds that his normal life is even more boring than before.  He asks Mindy to start training him to be a more effective hero.  They begin going on patrols together and Kick-Ass eventually joins up with a coalition of heroes who call themselves "Justice Forever."  Meanwhile, Chris (formerly Red Mist) accidentally kills his mother.  He blames the loss of both his parents on Kick-Ass and resolves to form his own coalition of supervillians in order to kill Kick-Ass.

 

This movie is vulgar.  And not in a good way.  In a cheap, adolescent way.  The entire movie feels as if it was written by 13-year old boys who've been awake for three days drinking Mountain Dew.  It's all unnecessary cursing and bodily functions.  Needless to say, it gets old really fast.

 

And it's not as if the actual events of the movie can keep you invested despite the crude screenplay.  The movie is a lot of Dave and Mindy hemming and hawing about being heroes.  Also, there are no transitions in this movie.  Scenes just happen.  It all equals a story in the end but there's no flow.  Subsequently, the pacing is very erratic with lots of lulls.

 

And Kick-Ass 2 has some terrible special effects.  The first movie was directed by Matthew Vaughn who went on the make X-Men: First Class which is a good movie despite it's dreadful special effects.  That's because Vaughn is a great storyteller.  He can keep you from being distracted by engaging you with strong characters and an exciting story.  Kick-Ass 2 was written and directed by Jeff Wadlow who also made Cry_Wolf and Never Back Down.  If you've never seen or heard of these movies, there's a reason.  Wadlow lacks the skill to overcome his film's visual faults.  It doesn't help that he can't overcome his script's faults either.

 

The comics are written by Mark Millar who can indulge in very juvenile writing.  Matthew Vaughn was able to mitigate that for his movie.  Wadlow, however, relishes in it.  The result is a movie that tries really, really hard to be cool.  But it is well known to high-schoolers that the harder you try to be cool, the less cool you are.

 

Final complaint: the weird sexual elements.  A big deal is made about Dave and Mindy having sex.  They're actually not but no one believes them.  People are constantly telling Dave that he's committing statutory rape (he's 18 and she's 15).  It's supposed to be funny because it's gross (it's not funny though).  But we are also subjected to scenes of Mindy oogling Dave's abs (her only weakness).  Why is this weird?  Because it is established early on that a young guy's abs fill Mindy with sexual desire.  There is a scene dedicated to 15-year old girls talking about how "wet" they're getting watching shirtless boys.  They even have close-ups of Mindy's awakening ovaries!  I know that teens are sexual beings but the scenes play out as if they were adults during the talky scenes of a soft-core porn (and the actresses aren't legal adults either, so no excuses).  But the worst is the cheerleading tryouts where a teen girl delivers a highly sexual audition dance.  It's not played as awkward.  The camera lingers over her and the intent is obviously to elicit arousal from male audience members.  She's 15!  The actress is 16!  It's very disturbing.  They top the movie off with Dave carrying on a sexual relationship with a woman in her thirties.  He may be 18, but he's still in high school.  It's all very uncomfortable.

 

Kick-Ass 2 is not worth your time.  It's a movie that only appeals to dumb 13-year old boys and pedophiles.  OK.  Correction.  If you're a dumb 13-year old boy or a pedophile, Kick-Ass 2 is totally worth your time.  Everyone else, go watch something else.  Watch Super.  It's a great movie about a guy who becomes a real-life superhero. 

 

4 out of 10

Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters

If there's one thing that the Percy Jackson films have going for them, it's a fun concept.  These movies are about independent teens whose parents are the Greek gods.  As such, these teens have special powers but the gods don't have anything to do with their offspring.  This provides the film's intended audience with the fantasy of parents that don't interfere with teenage independence.  It also provides the narrative with plenty of opportunity for drama based on parental abandonment issues which, considering the divorce rate, must hit home for a lot of the audience.

 

Specifically, this movie picks up far enough from the events of the first movie that Percy Jackson's accomplishments are being forgotten.  The young demigod training camp that Percy and his friends live at is attacked.  Usually, a force field that is powered by a tree protects the camp.  But a traitorous demigod poisons the tree leaving the camp's occupants vulnerable to the myriad monsters that wish to kill them.  It is decided that only the curative properties of the Golden Fleece can save the tree.  Percy and his friends team up with Percy's biggest rival and his Cyclops half-brother to retrieve the Golden Fleece and save the world while they're at it.

 

Sea of Monsters isn't quite as good as the first one, but it's still a pretty enjoyable movie.  The computer effects are pretty rough this time around (the brass bull is especially bad).  But the movie makes up for it with an abundance of enjoyable characters and plenty of fun action sequences.

 

Percy's Cyclops half-brother, Tyson, is the best of the new characters.  He's a little too dumb, but he's also relentlessly sweet.  Cyclops are known for being brutal monsters and Tyson is fighting that perception.  He also yearns for family and the way he instantly latched onto Percy could've been creepy or obnoxious, but the actor (Douglas Smith) manages to make him endearing.

 

And speaking of endearing actors, Nathan Fillion has a small supporting part in this movie.  Needless to say, he's worth the rental alone.  But we do lose a great actor from the first movie.  Pierce Brosnan is replaced by Anthony Head.  He's good and the role is pretty small, so it's not that obtrusive.

 

Overall, Sea of Monsters continues the adventures of Percy Jackson really well.  I get the feeling that the filmmakers are big Lucas/Spielberg fans.  A mythical whirpool turns into basically an aquatic version of Return of the Jedi's Sarlac and the box that contains Kronos looks just like the Ark of the Covenant from Raiders of the Lost Arc.  That sense of adventure is there too.  The next one comes out in 2015, so that gives you time to catch up on the books (which I hear are pretty good too).

 

7 out of 10

The Family

While 2013 has been a pretty good year for movies, it has been pretty rough in the comedy department.  Some of the worst things I saw all year are comedies.  It was with this exceedingly low expectation (and some pretty poor trailers) that I watched The Family.  And it turned out to be a pretty enjoyable movie!

The Family is about a mobster who is in Witness Protection.  He and his family have a very difficult time blending in with other people.  Somehow, they are placed in Normandy.  How can an American mafia family fit in among the inhabitants of a sleepy French village?  They can't.  At all.  And soon enough, the very people they're hiding from come to call.

Almost every joke works.  That's really impressive, if you ask me.  I never laughed out loud, but I chuckled a lot.  And I found myself grinning throughout the entire film.  It's always charming and fun.  The Family is just a piece of casual entertainment.  But that's great!  Sometimes, you just need a movie to provide you with a good time for a couple hours.

The entire cast is great (although Michelle Pfeiffer's accent is pretty bad in the early scenes).  Robert De Niro balances the comedy really well with his mobster persona, which is nice because his comedies are usually dreadful.  Pfeiffer's character is all over the place but never feels false.  And the kids (played by Dianna Agron and John D'Leo) dang near steal the show.  Throw in Tommy Lee Jones doing his grumpy schtick and the main cast is rock solid.

The bulk of the movie revolves around the culture clash between Americans (and sometimes the family's Italian heritage) and the French.  But it's not a movie that praises Americans, nor does it tear them down.  It's very even-handed in that both countries are shown to have their own awesome characteristics as well as some oddball things that the other nation can't stand.  You'll find yourself laughing at American eccentricities as much as you laugh at the French.

The Family's writer/director Luc Besson has made some of my favorite films, but sometimes he engages in a bit of fluff.  Sometimes it works.  Sometimes it doesn't.  This is one of the ones that works.  Now, The Family is no masterpiece.  It'll probably be largely forgotten in a few months, but it's worth a watch.

7 out of 10

One Direction: This Is Us

Yep.  I watched a documentary about One Direction.  Now that I've spent an hour and a half of my life on this movie, I have something to say to all the screaming, preteen girls out there: I totally get it now.  I completely understand the appeal of One Direction, more so than any other boy band.

This Is Us is actually a pretty good documentary.  It focuses on the origin of the band and the journey they take together until they set out on a world tour.  But it's not really at all about the tour.  There are live performances in the movie from the tour, but it's all about these young men and how fame has affected (and in some ways, not affected) them.

 

I was really impressed with how deep this movie went.  It's by no means a searing chronicle of One Direction.  It's produced by Simon Cowell who founded the band, so he wouldn't allow any negativity.  But director Morgan Spurlock (of Super Size Me fame) spends a lot of time with the band and their parents as they discuss the way in which the band essentially robbed them of the very important final years of their adolescence.  The regret expressed (especially by the parents) is striking and a very welcome emotional respite from the constant screaming of young girls.

 

And speaking of screaming girls, One Direction has a lot of fun with them.  The band seems to be as baffled by the behavior of the girls as I am.  They take every opportunity to toy with their fans.  They figure out ways to "play" the screaming like an orchestra conductor.  But the fun they have with their fans is never malicious.  They actually seem to be really great to their fans and fairly humble when on a one-on-one basis with people.

 

I'm still not a fan of their music, but they put on a good show.  Again, I completely understand the appeal these guys have.  They sing songs especially crafted to appeal to a naïve girl's ideal of romance.  They're good-looking and nice, but they're spontaneous enough (and have enough ill-advised tattoos) to be exciting.  Parents can feel good about their daughters daydreaming about these guys.

 

This Is Us is definitely made for One Direction fans, but fans of music documentaries should check this out too.  Or people who are just curious what all the hubbub is about.  It was made to be in 3-D and the in-your-face elements can be a little annoying, but otherwise it's a pretty solid movie.

 

7 out of 10

The Lone Ranger

What happened?  How can such a simple, awesome concept as the Lone Ranger go so wrong?

 

The simplest answer is: terrible script and Johnny Depp.  But I won't let The Lone Ranger off that easily.  So, before I get down to the nitty gritty of what is so abysmal about The Lone Ranger, I'll say that there are some good things going on in the movie.  Good things that really only serve to show how awesome it could've been (which just ends up making the final result look even worse in comparison).  For one, director Gore Verbinski makes great looking movies and The Lone Ranger is no exception.  It's beautiful.  Number two is the final action sequence.  There's a big showdown/chase involving two trains on parallel tracks.  The entire sequence is a giant homage to the thrilling climax to Buster Keaton's classic film The General (currently streaming on Netflix and for free on Hulu, so no excuses for not watching it).  The problem is that Buster Keaton did it better in 1926.  An actor (whose character we don't care about) green screened onto a speeding train lacks any tension.  OK.  Enough compliments.  Let's discuss why this is my least favorite movie of Summer 2013.

1) Johnny Depp.  Remember when hearing that Johnny Depp was starring in a movie was exciting?  Think way back.  Before the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie.  Now it's just hats and makeup.  His performance as Tonto is maybe the worst of them all (although his turns as Willy Wonka and The Mad Hatter as certainly contenders).  His Tonto is awful.  It's like he took Jack Sparrow and tossed in a healthy dose of Native American racism.  But I'm supposed to be charmed because he's always trying to feed his hat.

2) Flesh-eating, mutant, demon rabbits.  This totally happens and it's not as awesome as it sounds.  They show up for a few seconds in one scene and are never seen or talked about again.  You see, originally The Lone Ranger was a movie about a cowboy and his loyal Indian friend battling werewolves in the Old West.  The rabbits are either were-rabbits or affected by magic of some kind, but the werewolf plot was removed long before production.  Somehow, the rabbits stayed in the script.  This is just a prime example of the absolute mess of a movie this is.  It's like someone dumped several jigsaw puzzles together, mixed them up, and then threw half of the pieces away.

3) Too much.  There's several stories going but not enough time to develop them.  Tonto and the Lone Ranger both have revenge plots and there are two different conspiracy plots.  Any one plot would've been sufficient.  Even any two could've been handled well.  But all four stories are thrown together (not unlike the aforementioned jigsaw puzzle simile) and an attempt is made in the script to compress them all together instead of fleshing out a coherent narrative.  This lack of development leaves us with nonsensical plots being navigated by undeveloped characters.  By the time any "fun" action scenes happen, you just don't care.

4) Because the characters aren't just undeveloped, they're completely unlikable.  I don't care if you ever watched The Lone Ranger TV series or read any of the comics, it's a given that the Lone Ranger and Tonto are best friends.  In the movie, however, they hate each other.  But they have good reason to hate each other: they're terrible and annoying people.  But they screw each other over and annoy each other for so long that they eventually become friends (or at least hate each other a little less).  By the way, in this movie "kemo-sabe" doesn't mean friend.  It means "wrong brother," as in "you should be dead instead of your brother."  Golly, it's fun to watch Tonto wish the Lone Ranger was dead for two and half hours.

5) Cartoon physics for the heroes but real violence for everyone else.  I had this same problem with Jack the Giant Slayer, but there's a difference.  Jack the Giant Slayer is a fantasy, so people should be able to do impossible things.  The real issue there was that using real people in Looney Tunes-esque situations feels wrong.  In The Lone Ranger, they try to have Looney Tunes and gritty reality.  You can't mix characters being thrown 200 yards without harm with bloody cannibalism and horses that climb trees with the massacre of dozens of Indian women and children.

All in all, The Lone Ranger is a film I just wish I could forget.  Instead, it was such a rough experience that my recollection of it is especially vivid.  It's almost as if it happened in slow motion, which means that I spent even more time watching it than everyone else!  The Lone Ranger is really more sad than flat out terrible.  It's a movie that should've been so good.  The cast sounds so good on paper: Johnny Depp, Armie Hammer (who I hope finds a decent role soon), Ruth Wilson (watch her in the TV show Luther on Netflix), William Fichtner, Tom Wilkinson, Helena Bonham Carter, Barry Pepper.  All those people in a Western directed by Gore Verbinksi who was just coming off of the amazing Western, Rango.  It even has Oscar-nominated screenwriters!  But it just fails so completely that I felt worn out by the end.  Maybe in 5 or 10 years, when the reboot cycle comes around again, The Lone Ranger can be made as a smaller, more personal Western.  I never thought I'd be praying for a remake...

3 out of 10

Prisoners

Prisoners has been getting plenty of Oscar buzz.  And it's easy to see why.  It's a gripping and gritty drama/thriller with a stellar cast.  In fact, the deck is so stacked with this movie that I was concerned it was one of those films that are crafted just to try to win awards.  Thing is, those movies tend to be intensely mediocre and never win any awards.  It's even on the poster.  Academy Award nominees Hugh Jackman, Jake Gyllenhaal, Viola Davis (2 nominations!), and Terrence Howard.  They also have an Academy Award winner: Melissa Leo.  The poster even throws out that Maria Bello is a Golden Globe nominee (two nominations!).  I'm shocked that they didn't credit Paul Dano as a BAFTA nominee.  Prisoners is also helmed by Denis Villeneuve, the director of one of the 2010 Academy Award nominees for Best Foreign film.  It's also produced by the Academy Award nominated team behind The Blind Side.  It's filmed by master cinematographer, and 10 time Academy Award nominee, Roger Deakins.  It's even edited by an Academy Award winner!  Basically, this is a movie that feels like it was made to pander to award judges.  So does it actually succeed in being an Oscar contender?  Hell yes, it does!

 

Prisoners is about neighboring couples whose young daughters are kidnapped.  Hugh Jackman plays one of the fathers who becomes convinced of the guilt of a mentally handicapped young man (Paul Dano).  The story splits into two.  One follows Jake Gyllenhaal's dedicated detective's investigation and the other follows Jackman as he takes Dano hostage and attempts to torture the truth out of him.

 

This is a brutal film.  The torture is gut-wrenching, but that's the easy stuff.  It's the pain that these parents experience that really hurts.  It's more than just a mystery.  The audience is kept from knowing what really happened, not for the sake of suspense, but so that we can share in the fear of the unknown with the girls' parents.

 

The cast is beyond amazing.  But Jake Gyllenhaal and Maria Bello are the standouts.  I don't even really want to get into the performances.  There's too much to cover.  Talking about the acting in Prisoners could be its own article.  They are all worthy of acclaim.

 

This is a beautiful and heart-breaking film that grabs you from the moment it begins.  I loved this movie.  Finally, a seemingly Oscar bait movie that actually deserves Oscars.  It is easily among the absolute best of 2013.

 

8.5 out of 10

Man of Tai Chi

Man of Tai Chi is the directorial debut of Keanu Reeves (he also co-stars).  I'm going to say this right now: I like Keanu Reeves.  Some of that is nostalgic (I love both Bill & Ted movies and the TV show and Point Break is fantastic).  I think that he's actually a good, if limited, actor (he's flat-out great in My Own Private Idaho).  But can he direct?

Turns out that he can.  Reeves doesn't seem to have a strong directorial stamp or style (maybe because it's his first attempt).  He does, however, craft an attractive and fun martial arts film.  The main narrative is clean and steady with plenty of pretty tracking, dolly, and crane shots.  The cinematography combines the kinetic camerawork of Hong Kong films with the gloss and refinement of classic Hollywood.  That is until the fight scenes (of which there are a crap ton).  Reeves re-teams with his The Matrix fight choreographer, Yuen Woo Ping.  The fight scenes (which are incredibly staged!) are filmed in a very classic Hong Kong kung-fu movie style.  Shots are kept wide and handheld camerawork is kept to a minimum.  This allows the audience to see every bit of the fight and appreciate the skill involved.  Yuen Woo Ping has been directing kung-fu movies since 1978 and I'm sure that he had a lot of say in how his choreography was filmed.

 

Man of Tai Chi is a total Enter the Dragon rip-off.  And that's a good thing!  Tiger Chen plays a young Tai Chi student named Tiger Chen.  His skill in local competitions attracts the attention of an exceptionally wealthy man, Donaka Mark, who happens to run an illegal fighting ring.  Circumstances force Tiger to reluctantly accept Donaka's offer to fight for money.  Tiger quickly becomes Donaka's star fighter.  But when he realizes where his life is heading, it may be too late to back out.  It is literally a modern-day Enter the Dragon with a hefty dose of Star Wars' "the dark side."

 

Man of Tai Chi is peppered with great actors.  Keanu Reeves as Donaka Mark is an excellent villain. He's done it before in Kenneth Branagh's Much Ado About Nothing and the under-rated The Watcher.  He plays "sinister" very well. 

 

Tiger Chen is awesome!  He's believable as both the innocent delivery boy and the raging warrior.  The entire narrative arc is dependent on his acting ability and he nails it.  I can see him turning up in many action films over the next several years. 

 

Simon Yam also shows up in many scenes.  If you don't know who Simon Yam is, it is time to start renting some movies.  Try Full Contact or PTU or Election (the Hong Kong one, not the Reese Witherspoon one).  He's in a bunch of other awesome movies but this will start you off right.  He's always great, even in the rather small role he plays in Man of Tai Chi.

 

And the best small role for an incredible actor in this movie is when Iko Uwais shows up!  You'll probably be seeing a lot of this guy in the coming years.  He's an incredible martial artist from Indonesia.  He was in The Raid: Redemption recently, which is one of the best action movies ever.  I mean that.  One of the absolute best.  Ever.  He's also in a really great film called Merantau.  The fight between him and Tiger Chen is fantastic but a little short.

 

Finally, a shout out to the whoever is responsible for Karen Mok's character of Officer Sun Jingshi.  This is a role that was hugely refreshing.  A very small woman is cast as a relentless cop.  She isn't weaker than the male officers.  She's never helpless.  She's actually the best cop on the force.  The best part is that the film never points this out.  No mention is ever made of her gender.  It felt as if Karen Mok was cast in a role written for a man.  And she totally nails it!  It's definitely the standout performance of the film.

 

I'm really happy that I watched this movie.  Tai Chi doesn't get enough respect.  That's probably because your grandma does it twice a week at the park.  But it's an awesome martial art and hypnotic to watch.  Now when I need a Tai Chi fix, I have options.  Do I watch Man of Tai Chi or (one of my absolute favorite kung-fu movies) Drunken Tai Chi?  Either way, I'll win.  Hopefully, we see more of Keanu Reeves behind the camera.  I'm impressed so far.

 

8 out of 10

Fast & Furious 6

Back in 2001, I went to the movies and saw The Fast and the Furious.  And I hated it.  Then came the stupidly titled 2 Fast 2 Furious.  It's a slightly better film than the first but not really that enjoyable.  Then came The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift.  This always felt like a racing movie that had the Fast & Furious title slapped on it in order to sell it.  Yet, I felt that this was the best of the series.  And when Tokyo Drift is the best a franchise can do, it's time to walk away.  So when the 4th and 5th installments came out, I just stayed away.  But the word was that the series had shaken up its format and had become crazy and awesome action films.  Knowing that I'd be reviewing Fast & Furious 6 soon enough, I caught up on the previous two movies.

 

Continuing their tradition of poorly titled movies, the fourth film is called Fast & Furious.  It's just easier to say "the fourth one" so people don't confuse it with "the first one."  Well, I'd like to congratulate "the first one" on not being the worst of the series anymore!  Fast & Furious is awful.  It was so bad that I actively feared putting in the disc for Fast Five.  But I'm glad I did, because it's awesome!  Fast Five isn't a masterpiece.  It is, however, a super fun movie.

 

Now that the franchise finally had a really good entry under its belt, I was ready for (and I never thought I'd say this about this series, but I was actually anticipating) Fast & Furious 6.  While this newest movie isn't quite as good as the last one, it still kicks a lot of ass.

 

After the events of Fast Five, the crew are scattered around the globe living off the money they made from the previous movie (which for some appears to be hundreds of millions of dollars and for others maybe enough for the deposit on a new apartment).  After a former British Special Forces soldier and his team of car-based criminals attack a Russian convoy, DSS Agent Hobbs decides the only way to catch a team of car-based criminals is with a team of car-based criminals.  So, he offers Dom and his crew a full amnesty in exchange for their help.  The team agrees (but on their terms) and much car crashing and talk about the importance of family ensues.

 

Fast & Furious 6 has some great action sequences.  And it should, because that's what you're watching it for.  I loved every scene with the ramp car.  It's literally a ramp on wheels and the film makes the most of it.  There's also a great chase toward the end involving a tank.  All the action is superbly executed.  The editing is a bit fast but the camera tends to stay in wide and medium shots, especially during fist fights.  You can always see exactly what's going on.  Also, like in Fast Five, the majority of the action sequences involve real cars and stuntpeople with CGI acting as a support for the thrilling chases on screen.  This installment has the best action scenes of the series.

 

But the script is still dreadful.  The dialogue especially is really, really bad.  The jokes and one-liners are so relentlessly bad and delivered with such sincerity that it's charming.  And speaking of charming sincerity, Vin Diesel delivers all his lines about family as if his words are going to change the world.  It's hilarious and endearing to listen to Diesel say lines that wouldn't make the cut on a Lifetime Original Movie.

 

There is tons of unintentional hilarity that I could point out, but I'll leave it all up to you to discover.  And you should discover it.  Fast & Furious 6 is a great way to spend two hours on the couch.

 

7.5 out of 10  

 

P.S. It's very appropriate that Gal Gadot should be announced as Wonder Woman in the upcoming Man of Steel sequel.  She's pretty good in Fast & Furious 6.  She looks great and she holds her own in action sequences.  She may be a little skinny, but that's what exercise is for.  And she may not need to bulk up for the role.  I get the impression that Zach Snyder likes the art of Michael Turner and this informed his casting decision.

Looks about right to me. 

P.P.S. Now, for the elephant in the room.  Paul Walker died recently leaving this franchise on an indefinite hiatus.  He wasn't the best of actors, but he was in some pretty good movies.  His character in the Fast & Furious franchise may not be the most interesting but he always felt like an essential piece.  In this newest movie, the supporting members of the team have vastly more screentime than Walker or The Rock or Vin Diesel.  And they're fun to watch.  It gave me confidence that the series can survive without him, but it won't ever be completely right again.  As corny and saccharine as the constant droning about family is in these films, the actors have made it feel real.  And it's never easy to lose family.

Getaway

Getaway should've been awesome.  As a throwback to car-centric exploitation movies of the 70s, this should've been the movie I couldn't stop raving about.  Instead, it's like walking in on your parents' lovemaking: I wish I'd never seen it and I don't really want to talk about it.

 

But I don't get paid to not talk about movies.

 

Getaway is the story of an American former race car driver (living in Bulgaria) whose wife is kidnapped.  A mysterious caller forces him to steal a Limited Edition Shelby GT500 Super Snake and engage in much high speed mischief... or his wife will die!  Along the way, he picks up an American teenager (living in Bulgaria) who happens to be the owner of the Limited Edition Shelby GT500 Super Snake.  Together they must find a way to save the driver's wife and solve the puzzle of why they're being forced to drive around.

 

I was taught that if you can't say anything nice, you shouldn't say anything at all.  Well, I do have a couple nice things to say about this movie.  The Limited Edition Shelby GT500 Super Snake is awesome.  It's not product placement either.  They "auditioned" cars for the movie.  And the Limited Edition Shelby GT500 Super Snake delivers.  Also, all the car crashes and stunts are real.  That is a truly commendable thing.

 

OK!  Enough with the niceties.  Let's take a look at the bad stuff:

 

1) Getaway was filmed in two parts.  Part one is all the stunts which were filmed in Bulgaria.  Part two is in a Georgia (the state not the country) studio.  Usually this is not a problem.  But for some reason, the director chose to use professional movie cameras for the studio scenes and crappy dashboard cameras for the Bulgaria.  The movie doesn't take place in both Bulgaria and Georgia either.  It's all in Bulgaria.  So the clean, professional shots are intercut with footage that looks horrendous.  This makes the horrible footage look even worse!  It's like cutting scenes from The Fast and the Furious into the TV show Cash Cab.

 

2) In order for the mysterious caller to monitor the driver, the Limited Edition Shelby GT500 Super Snake is outfitted with dozens of little cameras.  It looks awful but they are at least supposed to be there.  But those little cameras provide the photography for the actual film too, allowing shots to be captured from inside the crashes.  Unfortunately, these ugly cameras are all over the other cars in the movie.  They shouldn't be and a minimum of digital work would remove them.  But, like the camerawork, they were just too lazy.

 

3) The editing is awful.  If you're going to make a movie where you crash real vehicles for the enjoyment of others, you should at least allow those people to see the vehicles crash.  Instead, we get a mess of shots where you can almost see a car crash.

 

4) Selena Gomez is terrible.  She gives one of the worst performances of 2013.  Just dreadful.  (And she says "Limited Edition Shelby GT500 Super Snake" a lot.)

 

There's plenty more awfulness I could mention, but you get the idea.  It's a bad movie.  You'd be better off seeking out some of the movies that Getaway is inspired by.  Or play Grand Theft Auto.  Either way, you're better off not wasting your time on this one. 

 

2.5 out of 10

The Smurfs 2

I liked the Smurfs when I was a kid.  I didn't love them (I was more of a Snorks fan), but they were fun to watch.  The movie, however, was pretty hard to sit through.  And I essentially sat through it twice (being that, for the reviews, I watch the original if I haven't already seen it before watching the sequel).

These movies take everything great about the Smurfs and make it horrible.

In The Smurfs 2, Gargamel is still stuck in our world but he's a famous magician touring the globe.  He's created a couple creatures called Naughties in an attempt to duplicate the same magic that resulted in Smurfette.  He creates a portal, kidnaps Smurfette and tries various means of making her confess the last bit of magic that will turn the Naughties into Smurfs.  Papa Smurf and a ragtag crew of other Smurfs reteam with Neal Patrick Harris and hit the streets of Paris to rescue Smurfette.  Can they reach her in time?  Will Neal Patrick Harris overcome his daddy issues?  Why is there a talking duck in this movie?  Some of these questions will be answered!

The Smurfs 2 is not a good movie.  But it's fairly easy to ignore.  There are plenty of "jokes" geared toward parents.  This is fairly common in modern kids' movies.  It gives the grownups who're forced to watch the movie some vague entertainment.  For the most part, really good kids' movies don't do this.  They don't need to pander to adults.  The Smurfs 2 not only constantly engages in this pandering, but the "grownup" jokes fail completely.  Not a single chuckle to be had.

The incessant showcasing of the Sony tablet becomes a bit much.  This is a Sony Picture and they tend to only allow their film characters to use Sony products, but this was ridiculous.  At every opportunity, the Sony tablet is in your face.

Speaking of "in your face," The Smurfs 2 was a 3-D theatrical release.  Much of the film is shot in such a way as to maximize the 3-D effects.  Very few people have 3-D setups at home, so many of the films action sequences and sight gags will be lost on the 2-D crowd.  Some of the intended 3-D shots are downright awkward in 2-D.

Final complaint: Neil Patrick Harris' kid is horrible to watch.  His performance is obnoxious.  The way his obnoxious performance is edited is even worse.  He just grins stupidly through the entire film and blurts out "Yay!" or "Smurfs!"  I think he's handicapped.  The performance only makes sense if the child is mentally handicapped.

What saves The Smurfs 2 from being among the absolute worst movies of the year is the cast.  Neil Patrick Harris and Brendan Gleeson show off their easy charm.  Jayma Mays is super adorable.  Katy Perry is actually really good as the voice of Smurfette and Christina Ricci does well as the voice of Vexy, the Naughtie.  While Hank Azaria is wasted as Gargamel, I did like the idea of him becoming a successful stage magician.

Again, this is not a good movie, but it should be easy for a parent to tune out.  If it entertains a child for 90 minutes and doesn't drive you nuts, I say rent it for the kids.  But don't expect any real enjoyment for yourself. 

3.5 out of 10

The Canyons

I watched The Canyons not because I felt that anyone else was interested in seeing it or what my thoughts on it were.  I watched it because I am a huge fan of Bret Easton Ellis.  His books are incredible (some are admittedly far superior to others).  The films based on those books are, at worst, enjoyable.  So, when he decided to take a stab at writing an original screenplay, I was instantly sold.  Couple his screenplay with the direction of Paul Schrader and I figured it would be at least be an interesting failure.  I was right.

 

The Canyons really isn't a bad movie.  It just fails to achieve its ambition.  And that may be the best way to describe the movie: ambitious.

 

Like all of Ellis' work, The Canyons is about young, jaded, wealthy people.  They engage a hedonistic lifestyle.  Bad things happen.  Ambiguous ending.

 

What sets Ellis' stories apart from each other is the way he captures these same types of people but in different places and times.  The wealthy, jaded youth of 1980s New York is different from that of Los Angeles.  But The Canyons doesn't seem to capture the wealthy, jaded youth of 21st century Los Angeles.  And if he actually has, then they are dull.  For all the drugs and orgies, they are just bland.

 

I think Bret Easton Ellis' stories work well on film because they are adapted by someone else.  A novel allows him to flesh out thoughts and motivations that must be excised in order to keep a film relatively short.  Screenwriters are usually good at this.  They find moments (or create them) that sum up those ideas and leave the rest to the actors.  But Ellis' screenplay is packed with people speaking their thoughts aloud to each other.  "Show,  Don't tell" is an old screenwriting lesson and it seems as if Ellis never learned it.  Ellis should have written this as a story.  Even a short story would work.  Then director Paul Schrader should've written the screenplay.  The man wrote Taxi Driver and Raging Bull!

 

As far as Lindsay Lohan goes, she's not very good.  Her many nude scenes will probably attract enough curious viewers, but her performance is lacking.  It's actually James Deen who turns in a fairly solid performance.  His involvement has also attracted a bit of buzz.  He's a porn star, yet he's a better actor than the professional actress.  It should be said to any horny teenage boys who are prepared to watch (or fast forward through) this movie to see Lohan naked, Deen has just as much (and maybe more) full frontal screen time.

 

All in all, The Canyons feels like a missed opportunity.  It's overwritten and thus feels overlong.  Despite it's salacious subject matter, it's not very exciting.  Paul Schrader manages to squeeze some really nice looking moments out of his low budget cast and equipment, but nothing great enough to really warrant renting this movie.

 

4 out of 10

The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones

The Twilight Saga's incredible success spurred every studio in Hollywood to try and scrape together a supernatural romance geared toward preteen girls (and weird, 40-something women).  Sony, via their Screen Gems label, picked up the rights to The Mortal Instruments series.  This seemed like a wise investment.  In addition to vampires and werewolves, The Mortal Instruments adds angels and demons.  Instead of a love triangle, The Mortal Instruments has a four way romance (a love square? love rhombus?).  Instead of Twilight's pre-marital abstinence, The Mortal Instruments has incest.  The final result of this Twilight one-upmanship is an extremely bizarre and surprisingly enjoyable movie.

 

The plot of this crazy Twilight meets Underworld by way of Interview with the Vampire movie is that the world is overrun by demons (who disguise themselves to look like people).  A group of demon killers known as Shadowhunters (who are half-angel and half-human and all neck tattoos) have been keeping them at bay.  A teen girl named Clary begins drawing a strange symbol over and over again.  Turns out her mother was a Shadowhunter who is in hiding because she alone knows the location of the Mortal Cup, one of the Mortal Instruments.  Clary inadvertently leads the evil Shadowhunters to her mother and they take her hostage (despite being in a self-imposed, potion-induced coma).  Clary, however, is rescued by small band of teen Shadowhunters.  She and her best friend, Simon, must find Clary's mother, discover the location of the Mortal Cup, and stop the ultimate evil Shadowhunter from opening Hell on earth in downtown New York City all while coping with her new feelings toward the young Shadowhunter, Jace, and learning to be a Shadowhunter herself (because Shadowhunting is genetic).  I left out so much plot and detail that it would blow your mind.  The Mortal Instruments is a very dense movie (in more ways than one). 

 

This has been a good week for reviews structured as lists of issues (good or bad) that I had with the movie.  So, let's keep that going here:

 

1) The Mortal Instruments tries way too hard to be clever.  Everyone throws around pithy one-liners but those one-liners are universally groaners.  In fact, most of Clary's one-liners are unnecessarily rude.  There is plenty to laugh at in The Mortal Instruments but none of it is intentional.

 

2) The "mythology" or "world building" or whatever is going on in the world of this movie is overly complicated.  Pages and pages of exposition may work in the books, but a movie cannot have characters continuously making speeches explaining what's going on.

 

3) Despite the terrible dialogue and bizarre plot, most of the actors turn in fairly strong performances.  Lily Collins is really good.  Jamie Campbell Bower juggles moody posing and action scenes well (although his best scene is when he throws a temper tantrum over being refused sex).  Jared Harris is acting like he's in a grand drama.  It's like he doesn't realize what kind of movie he's in.  But Jonathan Rhys Meyers does, and he hams up his every scene gloriously.  Even the lesser known, supporting actors are good.  They all make the movie easier to accept.

 

4) There are some scenes with truly great horror imagery.  I'm not sure if this is the doing of the director, Harald Zwart, whose filmography is full of awful movies.  The Mortal Instruments is photographed by Geir Hartly Andreassen who has worked on several rather beautiful films.  It doesn't really matter who is responsible.  It just added nicely to the supernatural aspect of the film.

 

5) Some of the action scenes are really good, especially the big fight in the vampire hotel.  The action may be slightly over-edited, but it's all shot with enough distance and a steady camera.  You can actually see what's going on!  And you want to too.  The staging is fun.  Lots of swords and flips and interesting use of the surroundings.

 

6) This movie has strong gay characters!  They're not comic relief and they are taken seriously and treated as equal members of their groups.  One of them is a super powerful warlock who kinda saves the day.  This is not something I expect to see in mainstream movies, let alone a Twilight knockoff.  I hope that we see more of this in the coming years.

 

7) This one is sorta nitpicky but it drove me crazy.  They use a tarot deck several times in the movie, but it's only comprised of about 14 cards.  There's more than 14 cards in a tarot deck.  There are 78 cards in a tarot deck!

 

8) The Shadowhunters, whose entire purpose is to fight demons, are terrible at fighting demons.  They fight vampires extremely well.  One Shadowhunter can kill dozens of vampires with relative ease, but it takes three Shadowhunters to fight off, and ultimately lose to, one demon.  Simon, the nerdy best friend who is not a Shadowhunter, manages to subdue a demon with nothing but a shovel.

 

9) If you're looking to capture the chic style of your favorite The Mortal Instruments character, go check out the Mega Sale going on at Rue 21!  It's a really awkward bit of product placement, but I can appreciate any clothing store that allows a werewolf to beat a demon to death with one of its mannequins on screen.

 

10) They have a Stargate!  But even cooler than that is how they film it.  They take a page from the films of  Jean Cocteau and built a pool that looks like the portal.  The actors then jump in the pool.  When the image is shown upright, it results in real splashes that defy gravity.  The rules of the portal make absolutely no sense but the filming of it is great.

 

11) The make-out scene in the greenhouse is one of the funniest things I've seen all year.  Most of the unintentional humor in The Mortal Instruments comes from how seriously the filmmakers take the utterly ridiculous subject matter and script.  After some laughable flirtations and near kisses (on a spiral staircase surrounded by flowers), Clary and Jace finally give the audience the kiss we all knew was coming... and then the sprinkler system turns on for no reason as the music swells romantically.  Jace apologizes for the sprinklers and they leave.  It's awesomely dumb!

 

12) Incest.  It's pseudo-incest, but it totally happens.  You will feel icky.

 

The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones is not a great or even a very good movie, but it's better than most of the junk marketed toward teenage girls.  When it is good, it's totally watchable; when it's bad, it's even better.  I give this movie a recommendation for teen girls and for those who get a kick out of unintentional comedy.

 

5.5 out of 10

The Wolverine

After the horror that was X-Men Origins: Wolverine, I had the lowest of expectations for this new adventure with everyone's favorite, metal-skeletoned mutant.  Well, I was more than pleasantly surprised.  The Wolverine is a really good movie (except for the last 20-ish minutes)!

The Wolverine focuses on Logan's adventures in Japan.  He is asked to visit an incredibly successful Japanese businessman whom he saved from the atomic bombing of Nagasaki during WWII.  The man is on his deathbed and he informs Logan that he can take his healing ability.  This would allow the old man to live and Logan to finally be able to lead a normal life.  When he refuses and the old man dies, the old man's sexy nurse steals Logan's powers anyway, and Logan must save the old man's daughter from conspiring relatives, the Yakuza, and lots of ninjas without the benefit of instant healing.

Hugh Jackman is still great as Wolverine.  But it's Rila Fukushima as Yukio who is the real standout of the movie.  Not only does she have a very unique look, but she nails the myriad emotions her character is called upon to experience.  Maybe it is because she is the only character who has more than one emotional state that allows her to actually act, but she definitely comes across as the great actor of the cast.

There's some excellent action sequences that are separated by long tracts of character building.  This gives the action greater weight.  The bullet train sequence is the best of the bunch and one of the most memorable action scenes I've seen all year.

The Wolverine does have some tonal issues especially in that last 20 minutes.  Once Logan enters the techno-pagoda and fights a giant robot, the movie seems to go a bit off the rails.  I'm a fan of schlock, camp, and cheese, so I don't hate the ridiculousness of that final showdown.  It just doesn't fit in at all with the rest of the film.

I wish I had more to say about The Wolverine.  It's a rock solid Hollywood blockbuster and one of the best films of summer 2013.  Do not miss this one (but let's all agree to pretend that X-Men Origins: Wolverine never happened).

7.5 out of 10

RED 2

With the immense popularity of comic book movies in recent years, there have been some oddball titles picked up by various studios.  One of those titles was RED, the story of several, well-aged covert agents coming out of retirement to fight for their lives. 

 

RED was immensely successful.  It has great action.  It's super funny.  And the cast is really impressive.  It also had the benefit of coming out shortly after The Expendables and was able to ride the wave of action nostalgia that people were enjoying.  A sequel was inevitable.

 

Luckily for all of us, RED 2 is just about as good as the first.  It has problems, but it also has some added awesomeness.  If you've seen the original, you know whether or not you'll like the sequel (the plot is practically the same).  So, I'm just going to break down the things that set RED 2 apart from its predecessor:

 

1) John Malkovich steals the whole movie.  In the first movie, he just steals his scenes.  Bruce Willis almost feels like the sidekick.  Willis just sleepwalks through action movies anymore and Malkovich is chewing scenery like he hasn't eaten in a month.  Willis shouldn't even be in the third movie.  It should just be the Malkovich show.

 

2) Byung-Hun Lee is in this movie!  American audiences (who don't watch a lot of Korean films) will recognize him as Storm Shadow in the dreadful G.I. Joe movies.  But if you seek out the films he stars in back in South Korea, you'll be introduced to an amazing actor with some amazing movies throughout his career.  His English is also getting really good which hopefully will help him appear in more American action films.  By the way, his two best films (The Good, The Bad, and the Weird and I Saw the Devil) are currently "Play Instant" on Netflix.

 

3) Helen Mirren.  She has a much larger part to play in the sequel and more Mirren equals better movie.

 

4) In the first movie, Karl Urban was cast as a younger man who hunts (and is bested) by the wiley old-timers.  In RED 2, Neal McDonaugh takes that role, but he's used much better.  McDonaugh has a naturally sinister feel that suits this type of role.  Is he being type-cast?  Absolutely!  But he's being type-cast perfectly.

 

5) David Thewlis!  An unexpected casting decision.  He's one of England's great screen actors and he channels that into a weasely, wine-loving assassin.  He makes a throw away role one of the more memorable of the movie.

 

Now comes some bad stuff...

 

6) Mary-Louise Parker has this awful jealousy subplot that stops being a subplot and starts to take over the whole movie.  She is reduced to being a whiny, obnoxious brat.  I found myself hoping that the movie would throw a curveball and kill her off.  No such luck.  I wouldn't be shocked if in the third movie, her clingy psycho-girlfriend behavior drove her to become the new person who's trying to kill Bruce Willis and his friends.  It's that bad.

 

7) Papa John's.  The pizza chain is given a ridiculous amount of screen time.  It's super distracting.  And I refuse to believe that secret agents would take the time during an important mission to eat a couple slices of Papa John's pizza.  I don't care how much they claim to like it, getting diarrhea in the middle of an operation is a bad idea.

 

8) Too many heroes.  Sequels tend to be bigger than the original, but the amount of heroes on the roster here hurt the film a bit.  The bad guys don't stand a chance and that removes a lot of tension from the movie.  Also, trying to give all these stars adequate screen time results in a diluted film.  For further examples of this see Ocean's Twelve and Ocean's Thirteen.

 

9) They attack the Iranian Embassy without provocation.  And when the fight is over, they offer no explanation (top secret, of course).  Yet, there are no consequences to this course of action.  I was on the edge of my seat wondering how they were going to get out of this situation.  Turns out that a budding nuclear power headed by a madman just laughed the whole thing off.  You can't do something in a movie that would have such intense real-world repercussions and not address it.  It's very off putting.

 

10) This last one is both good and bad.  RED 2 has some great practical effects.  A lot of real stunts and explosions are on display.  I love practical effects.  Even when they don't look all that good, practical effects feel real, because they are real.  The problem in RED 2 is that they also use a lot of CGI.  When CGI is put next to real things, it looks cartoony.

 

But RED 2 ends up being a crazy, fun movie.  It's a bunch of actors you know and love having a great time blowing things up and shooting people.  It's got enough comedy and kick-ass ladies to placate most girlfriends/wives.  It's got enough old people kicking ass to make your dad happy (and leave him feeling like he could still take you in a fight).  This is just a great action flick that most anyone can enjoy.  So, rub some Ben-Gay on your joints and sprinkle some Metamucil on your popcorn, because RED 2 is going to rock your night.

 

7.5 out of 10