Secret of the Cruise: “Mission Impossible Rogue Nation” is Another Fantastic Spy Action Thriller

The “Mission: Impossible” is definitely going down in history as the most confusing action franchise ever conceived. But you know what? The films contain some of the most mind-blowing action sequences ever capture on film. The fifth in this ever evolving, yet always familiar, series subtitled “Rogue Nation” continues the breathless beats continued by Brad Bird’s 2011 hit “Ghost Protocol.” The newest entry’s wow fact is diminished slightly but not having an IMAX filmed sequence set the top of the world’ tallest building but it has several standout sequences most other action films could only dream of having. The film remains true to the Mission Impossible series by having amazing action while the slower scenes are filled with impossible to understand exposition and vocabulary only recognized by whatever CIA members or other agents might be in the audience.

“Mission Impossible - Rogue Nation” begins with an action sequence so crazy that it could have only be done for real. And that involves, as the film’s marketing campaign heavily showed us, Tom Cruise literally hanging off an airplane as it takes off into the air. It’s a thrilling opening and it sets the stage for the craziness that will ensue. And since one cannot so simply summarize the plot of a Misison Impossible film it makes more sense to just acknowledge the other elements that make or break the film.

At the film’s core is a beautifully directed sequence set inside a Vienna opera house shot with Hitchcockian precision. Director Christopher “The Usual Suspects” McQuarrie, taking the realms from Brad Bird, injects a tad more serious tone to the proceedings but it’s no less fun and his opera scene is every bit as exciting as watching Tom Cruise hanging off of a skyscraper. The plot basically involves Cruise’s immortal IMF agent Ethan Hunt, still on the search for the evil Syndicate which brings him to Vienna to stop a possible assassination. This opera sequence contains almost no dialogue and is filled to the brim with suspense and expert editing and camerawork.

Another standout sequence involves Hunt attempt to infiltrate a computer server locked away underwater. It’s a thrilling sequence with almost unbearable tension even if you know that Hunt is literally indestructible. It literally feels like an impossible mission, but we, the audience, know better. The film also takes a page from James Bond and features a great car and motorcycle chase. I think most of these films have learned after seeing the terrific stunt work in Christopher Nolan’s films and Sam Mendes’ Skyfall. You’ve got to step it up otherwise it’s yawn city.

“Mission Impossible Rogue Nation” is one of those films that feels almost impossible to comprehend and yet it’s impossible not to just love because of the incredible action. The actors are all very solid as well. Cruise is in top form, even showing off a bit of comic flair after Ethan’s tries to recuperate from his underwater adventure. And Simon Pegg is once again terrific in an even more expanded role after he was promoted to field agent in the last film. In a lot of ways, the movie sort of works as a buddy action film with Pegg and Cruise playing rather nicely off each other. I sort of missed Paula Patton’s character but we’re given Rebecca Ferguson’s mysterious character instead. Over all, I probably enjoyed the overall spectacle of “Ghost Protocol” more, but “Rogue Nation” fits rather quite nicely into a franchise that, like its star, just keeps getting better with age.  GRADE: B+

Theatrical Trailer for Mission: Impossible Rogue Nation on TrailerAddict.

Judging Amy: “Trainwreck” is a Delightfully Raunchy Yet Heartfelt Rom Com

Put simply, “Trainwreck” is sort of a raunchy Woody Allen film for the millennial generation. It’s sort of ode to New York City (a rarity for director Judd Apatow whose previous films take place in LA) and follows a woman who can’t quite seem to get her life together, though she’s perfectly okay with it. It has many of the trademark Apatowisms like funny supporting players, scenes that go on way too long, and yet strangely enough no appearances by Apatow regulars like Seth Rogen or Paul Rudd, which actually feels refreshing. Instead we get a perfect breakout role for comedian Amy Schumer who also wrote the script. As someone who has never bared witness to anything Ms. Schumer has contributed to the world until this, I can honestly say she does a darned fine job at both acting and writing. I wouldn’t be surprised if she even received award recognition here (at the very least a Golden Globe nod).  “Trainwreck” works because it takes everything we know or expect about romantic comedies and just goes for the jugular. It’s way more insightful and character driven than most of its ilk and while it doesn’t necessarily do anything particularly original cinematically the film works on several levels.

I can’t say how fresh it feels to see a film directed by Judd Apatow that wasn’t also written by him. Having a female voice changes things up dramatically but still having that raunchy male eye behind the camera is a perfect combo – especially since Amy Schumer can get be just as dirty as her male counterparts. Schumer plays Amy Townsend who lives a free-spirited lifestyle. She a writer for a sleazy men’s magazine, she sleeps around, drinks a lot, and doesn’t want any kind of meaningful relationship. She’s close with her similarly free-spirited and divorced father who has recently been brought to a nursing home. Her sister Kim (Brie Larson) is a perfect foil for Amy: she’s settled down with a husband and her lame stepson who the film likes to make the butt of the joke. The film basically tells two stories: the story of Amy and her sister and their differing points of view on life and that of Amy and sports medicine doctor Aaron Chambers (Bill Hader) who she must write an article about and ends up falling for.

The film is peppered with memorable side characters and cameos that accompany Amy and Aaron’s romantic journey. Aaron works with several high profile sports celebrities and is best friends with LeBron James who appears as himself. Hader’s scenes with James are sometimes funny but sometimes go on too long. His presence (and Aaron’s career in sports medicine in general) feels like a way to just get guys to see the film but it’s sort of a different approach to the material and otherwise welcomed. LeBron James isn’t the worst athlete-turned-actor, but he definitely shouldn’t quite his day job. He’s certainly not as bad as WWE wrestler John Cena who appears in an extended cameo as a guy Amy is dating early in the film who unwittingly makes homoerotic jokes at his own expense. Tilda Swinton is particularly memorable as Amy’s tense boss who says mostly inappropriate things. SNL’s Vanessa Bayer has a decent role as Amy’s co-worker and wrings some decent laughs despite her unfortunately mitigated screen time.

Schumer’s script her performance is what really stand out here. It goes from raunchy comedy to sentimental drama sometimes within the same scenes and Apatow’s assured direction makes sure the transitions are seamless. It also works as an ode to the endless array of New York set romance films that the film even squeezes in a Woody-approved (save for the funny joke made at his expense) “Manhattan” like montage complete with ‘Rhapsody in Blue’ jazzing up the soundtrack. Sure the film probably meanders in parts and is probably 10 or 15 minutes too long (it sort of feels like a DVD’s unnecessarily longer director’s cut). However, the film features extremely sharp and observant humor, some of which will probably be dated in a few years’ time, but it’s such a charmingly vulgar and refreshing reflection of our present day that you’re likely to identify with the characters and thoroughly enjoy it. For sidesplitting laughs with a well-earned emotional core, and easily the funniest Judd Apatow directed film since "Knocked Up," you could do a lot worse than “Trainwreck,” just leave the kids at home.  GRADE: A-

Trailer for Trainwreck on TrailerAddict.

King of the Hill: Marvel’s “Ant-Man” is a Fun Little Film That Doesn’t Bite

There are lots of ants in “Ant-Man.” More than I ever thought. Because Ant-Man doesn’t just shrink down to the size of an ant but he also controls them with his thoughts. Thank goodness the only spider in Spider-Man is the one that bites Peter Parker, otherwise it would be scarier than “Arachnophobia.” Thankfully, I’m not that afraid of ants. The premise of the little known Ant-Man character is silly to be sure, but it also works tremendously well onscreen mostly because of star Paul Rudd’s endless likability and director Peyton Reed’s firm comedic grasp of the material. “Ant-Man,” written essentially as a comedic heist film, is probably one of Marvel’s funniest films, and probably one of its weirdest. It’s certainly not quite as successful as last summer’s surprise hit “Guardians of the Galaxy” but it fits nicely into the Marvel Cinematic Universe even if it’s a smaller scale adventure with less ambition than its older, more popular brothers Iron Man and Captain America.

Paul Rudd is perfectly cast as cat burglar Scott Lang, though I have no idea if the comic character Scott Lang was ever described as a Paul Rudd-type. Lang, is just being released from prison and is determined to make amends with his young daughter and ex-wife. Soon after his release he’s recruited by scientist Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) to help with a heist involving the protection of a powerful shrinking formula (shades of “Honey, I Shrunk the Kids” are to be expected). The film functions as an origin story, showing how Lang is introduced to a special suit that can shrink to the size of an insect and grow back within seconds which gives him super strength. He also becomes ruler of the ants by communicating with the bugs through telepathy. It’s a premise you either go with or you don’t, if you can make it through any of the other eleven Marvel films you’re bound to at least enjoy this one.

The real strength of “Ant-Man,” in an age where superhero films are as consistent as the rising sun, is the reliance of humor to tell its story. Rudd is paired up with his prison pal Luis played by Michael Pena who provides outstanding comic relief. So much of their dialogue feels improvised I’m not shocked to see Rudd’s name listed as one of the film’s four screenwriters. Though it’s interesting to wonder how much of original director Edgar Wright’s script was left intact. Corey Stoll is also a highlight as a former apprentice of Pym’s who eventually becomes the villainous Yellowjacket. He spends a lot of the movie turning people that cross him and test animals into tiny gobs of snot with his own not-quite-perfected shrinking technology. Evangeline Lilly is also actually quite good as Pym’s daughter Hope and a potential love interest for Scott. All of the actors are solid and well-cast.

I thoroughly enjoyed “Ant-Man.” I think I would describe is as Marvel-lite. It’s not quite effective as the more solid Captain America or Iron Man films but it’s definitely much better than the ones people tend to think less of, i.e. “Thor” and “The Incredible Hulk.” And it must be said that the effects are nicely handled here they’re cool without being overblown; they’re convincing more than realistic which works for the film. And for a film with such a weird premise the film is wisely grounded in reality. The heist plot also feels like a fun change of pace. You can see that with this entry that even if Marvel is giving us the same stuff over and over again, they’re at least nice enough to give us a new flavor.  GRADE: B 

Trailer for Ant-Man on TrailerAddict.

Hey Arnold! Too Convoluted For Its Own Good, “Terminator Genisys” is Still Nostalgic Fun

I've always had a theory that movie sequels that come out years after the previous entry rarely work. I was proven wrong with the recent release of the thrillingly fun “Jurassic World.” Now we have another beloved franchise with another entry (the fifth one if you're keeping track) called “Terminator Genisys.” Odd titled spelling aside, the film is decently fun and it returns Arnold Schwarzenegger to one of his most famous roles, but the film's confusing time travel plot line becomes more head-scratching than truly thrilling.

First of all, let's address the elephant in the room. It must be said right away that “Terminator Genisys” has a problem before the movie even begins, and it's no real fault of the film or filmmakers: its trailer reveals a plot element that should have never been revealed. You know about it it, as did I. It doesn't really hurt the movie, but takes away what would have been a fun surprise. Having said that the revelation is interesting to say the least and the less said about it to people who haven't seen the film the better.

There's nothing truly wrong with this fifth entry. Director Alan Taylor (Thor: The Dark World) is completely capable of delivering fun action scenes, even if none of them are truly as memorable as what James Camera gave us decades ago. Even the actors are pretty good. Jai Courtney, mostly known as playing Bruce Willis' son in the dreadful fifth Die Hard film, gives one of his better performances as Kyle Reese the man who is sent back in time to protect Sarah Conner (played this time by Game of Thrones' Emilia Clarke) who will eventually give birth to John who will become a leader in the futuristic war of man vs machines. Clarke makes a good Sarah Connor though she's no Linda Hamilton. Jason Clarke (last seen in “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes”) is the adult John who sends Kyle back in time. Anyone who knows this franchise well will either love the film's fun attempt to retroactively change the earlier entries' chronology, or completely hate it: It turns out, a good version of the T-800 (Schwarzenegger) was sent to Sarah's childhood and has been protecting her… so when the T-800 from the first film shows up in 1984, there is an Arnold vs Arnold fight every sci-fi nerd has been waiting for. Though it's over much too quickly.

One can't even describe the full plot of “Genisys” without getting a headache so it's pointless to attempt to tell it here. Screenwriters Laeta Kalogridis and Patrick Lussier spend most the script changing everything about the first few films. There's also way more time travel than any of the other films (though it is pretty cool to see how it all works) which creates too many complex story elements that are way too difficult to keep track of. A time travel film can only be successful if it's done in a relatively simple way and if it makes the story pretty airtight. There's nothing all that airtight in “Genisys” and I stopped trying to figure it all out by the halfway point. And I still don't understand the point of recent Oscar winner J.K. Simmon's character. And I don’t think the film knows either.

“Terminator Genisys” will easily be one of those divisive entries. Some fans of the series will enjoy it and others with loathe it. Put me somewhere in the middle. It has plenty of positives including the return of Arnold, a fun take on elements from the earlier films, and a sense that the filmmakers had fans in mind. At this point in the series I'm not sure what other direction the film could have taken (and it's much better than “Salvation”) but I'm convinced nothing will ever top Cameron's films.  GRADE: B-

Trailer for Terminator: Genisys on TrailerAddict.

Girl, Interrupted: Pixar Returns to Form with the Emotionally Charged “Inside Out”

Pixar has done it again. It’s a clichéd statement but one that fits like a comfortable pair of shoes. After a few hiccups (like the misguided “Cars 2” and the Oscar-winning but ineffectual “Brave”) Pixar has made a triumphant return to what Pixar does best: creating astonishingly entertaining and clever stories set in the unlikeliest of places. “Inside Out” might be quite literally their most cerebral animated flick yet but it also is just as funny, ingenious, and emotional since their hot-streak trifecta of “Wall-E,” “Up,” and “Toy Story 3.” “Finding Nemo” remains my personal favorite (and "Cars" is disturbingly underrated) but “Inside Out” comes darn close to capturing the sheer joy of seeing that film for the first time. “Inside Out” tells two stories: it’s about a young girl named Riley who has a perfect life until her family moves, and the other is taking place entirely inside Riley’s mind where her emotions are personified and anthropomorphized into some of the funniest and most clever characters Pixar has ever imagined.

“Inside Out” is the creation of co-directors Pete Docter and Ronaldo Del Carmen who have crafted a delightfully witty and emotional story about growing up. Inside young Riley (voiced by Kaitlyn Dias) are five main emotions: the control freak leader Joy (Amy Poehler), the gloomy gal Sadness (The Office’s Phyllis Smith), the worrisome Fear (Bill Hader), the temper tantrum throwing Anger (Lewis Black), and the Mean Girl-as-emotion Disgust (Mindy Kaling). To say these five characters are perfected cast and performed is an understatement. Joy, as the unofficial ring leader of the group, operate in Riley’s brain in a control room type command center where memories are created in form of small spheres. Many of them are yellow-colored because they’re happy memories. When Riley is angry Anger takes over the controls, shen she’s frightened it’s Fear at the reins, in a very literal representation of basic human experience. By the end of the film you’ll be wondering what the personified characters inside your own brain may be like. The film’s inner mind plot becomes complicated when Joy and Sadness are accidentally sucked out of the control center and must find their way back leaving Anger, Disgust, and Fear to take control. Without Joy and Sadness will the now apathetic Riley ever snap back into the joyful girl she once was?

Holy smokes, “Inside Out” is a delightful yet deep instant animated classic. Every single person responsible for this amazing film is in simply top form. This is arguably the studio’s most original and fun and emotional film since “Finding Nemo.” Pixar is so good at literalizing things in ingenious ways. For instance, at some point Joy and Sadness attempt to ride Riley’s “train of thought” back to headquarters which is an actual train. They have delightful, almost Alice in Wonderland encounters including the movie’s unsung hero Bing Bong (Richard Kind) as Riley’s imaginary friend and a fascinating yet dangerous excursion into “abstract thought” where the animation becomes just as abstract. And what about Riley’s dreams that are setup like a Hollywood movie studio complete with writers, directors, and corny movie sets and props? Every single bit works extremely well and it’s all wrapped up in an exciting story that hits emotional levels not unheard of in a Pixar film.

“Inside Out” is simply a cinematic treat. It’s easily one of the cleverest and most unique animated movies ever conceived; it’s a delightful visualization of the emotional roller coaster that is growing up that’s relatable to every human being. Even as a film with a bizarre concept, it’s so well thought out and executed you can’t even believe that it all actually works.  Pixar has also created a delightful group of new characters included standouts Sadness and Bing Bong. It is funny in all the right places and will make you an emotional wreck in all the right places as well. This exceptional film is smart and mature enough to be a sheer joy for adults and yet fun and colorful enough for the kids. It’s easily one of Pixar’s best and won’t soon be forgotten.  GRADE: A

Feature Trailer for Inside Out on TrailerAddict.

Dino-Mite: “Jurassic World” Brings a Beloved Franchise Roaring Back to Life

The appeal of “Jurassic World” always was and will always be finally getting to see a working dinosaur theme park. A vision the eccentric billionaire John Hammond always wanted. And it is a rather awesome place; not unlike a dinosaur-themed Disney World. I'm not sure why it could be so successful since the terrible incidents depicted in the first film (and it's debatable whether this fourth entry most likely ignores parts 2 and 3) and the fact that you have to fly half way around the world to visit. But it's a pretty amazing place. You can kayak down a river with the friendly dinosaurs. Watch a Shamu-like aquatic presentation complete with feeding time with a great white shark. Oh and the shark is the food. It's a park filled to the brim with tourists and everything seems to be running smoothly. And then, as is this franchise's mantra, all hell breaks loose.

It must be said that one must reign in their expectations when it comes to this fourth entry. No new Jurassic Park sequel will ever beat the original especially if you consider it a life-changing experience as most people between the ages of 20 and 40 will tell you. “Jurassic World” feels like it was designed with most of those people in mind who always wondered what a real working dinosaur park would be like.

The film sets up it's premise rather unspectacularly but efficiently. Two brothers are shipped off to visit their Aunt Claire (Bryce Dallas Howard) who is the operations manager at Jurassic World. It's a fully functional, and successful, dino theme park on Isla Nublar (the same location from the first film). Claire is a busy woman though, as she's preparing a new attraction featuring a genetically modified hybrid dinosaur that is bigger and meaner than anything they've created before, so she doesn't have much time to spend with her nephews: the teenage Zach (Nick Robinson) and younger Gray (Ty Simpkins). Park owner Simon Masrani (Irrfan Khan) comes to check out the new dinosaur but insists Velociraptor expert Owen Grady (Chris Pratt) check out the vicious dinosaur's enclosure for safety measures.

If you're guessing that this new dinosaur, named Indominus Rex, somehow breaks loose and wrecks havoc upon the entire park you'd be correct. To say much more would ruin all the fun. There is a side story about InGen security guy Vic Hoskins (Vincent D'Onofrio) who wants the raptors, who Owen has been working with to train (don't worry, they're still pretty lethal, intelligent, and scary) for other reasons. And then there's the engineer played by BD Wong, the only character from the first film, who has a more “important” role. Meanwhile, Claire’s nephews sneak off from the care of Claire's assistant who was tasked with watching the boys. And let's just say they get onto the gyrosphere ride at the worst possible time.

“Jurassic World” somehow works really well. Howard and Pratt are perfectly cast and give convincing performances. There's a slight love story involved but it's nowhere near the corny and forced storyline shoehorned into many movies like this. Sure the film isn't directed by Steven Spielberg, but Colin Trevorrow makes an adequate replacement. He hits all the right buttons with a script filled with delightful Jurassic Park callbacks. This film truly feels like the direct Jurassic Park sequel we've all been waiting for. The action scenes, while not as iconic as the first film, are well staged and memorable. The effects are also well-done but never as awe-inspiring as the first time we saw those Brachiosauruses in 1993. Michael Giacchino's score is efficient with just enough John Williams beats to be familiar and comforting.

As a big “Jurassic Park” fan I truly loved everything about “Jurassic World.” It made me feel like a kid again. Is it every bit as good as the first film? Of course not. Nothing will ever be as good. It works much better than the second and third films. It's fun, intense, surprisingly graphic, and filled with just enough wonder to make you wish “Jurassic World” was a real place. Not that anyone would be able to afford it the trip, unless maybe they had a coupon day or something.  GRADE: A-

Theatrical Trailer for Jurassic World on TrailerAddict.

Without Further Ado: Creepy Prequel “Insidious Chapter 3” Improves Upon Its Predecessor

“Insidious” was one of the more memorable horror entries in the genre to come out in quite some time. It was a low-budget ghost story with relatable characters, an interesting story, and most importantly well-earned frights. A sequel was inevitable but while the “Back to the Future Part II” type hijinks were fun the second film failed to even come close to the original. How could this third entry with an almost entirely new casts (because it's a prequel) be any good whatsoever? It surprisingly is. It deepens the story of the likable medium Elise (Lin Shaye) and how she comes to work with those two silly ghosthunters while delivering enough decent scares to keep you on edge.

It's wonderful how far Shaye, sister of former New Line Cinema president Bob Shaye, has come in her career. She was basically planting in various New Line movies in tiny roles because nepotism. She's the teacher in “A Nightmare on Elm Street” she's Mrs. “Noogieburger” in “Dumb & Dumber” and she was a flight attendant in “Snakes on a Plane.” Of course, let's not forget her memorable turn as the dog-kissing human leather bag Magda in “There's Something About Mary.” Here, as one of the industry's hardest working character actors she's finally given the standout role practically headlining her own movie at the ripe old age of 71.

The story of “Insidious Chapter 3” involves a teenage girl named Quinn (Stefanie Scott) who lives in an apartment with her widowed father and younger brother. She contacts Elise to help her “communicate” with her mother. A short time later, a tragic accident occurs which leads Quinn to be haunted by an evil entity. Elise is called upon, though she previously insisted on being retired, to help the girl after strange and disturbing phenomenon occur. Quinn's dad initially contacts two ghostbusting dudes from the internet, who are Elise's co-workers from the first and second film. One of them is played by Leigh Whannell, who co-wrote all the films and makes his directorial debut here. Taking the reigns from James Wan (too busy directing Furious Seven, who appears onscreen in a brief cameo) Leigh's debut is completely efficient. His film isn't far from the look and feel of the first two films, as many of the same crew members return.

“Insidious Chapter 3” feels like it's missing the legitimacy of stars Rose Byrne and Patrick Wilson, but there's actually a welcomed breath of fresh air in this storyline. As Quinn's dad, Dermot Mulroney does a great job of being a likable dad. He's definitely not the typical horror movie dad who doesn't believe the strange and bizarre things going around in his home. The real star here of course is Shaye who makes the film her own. She's 71 she's definitely earned it and actually has the talent to pull it off.

And thankfully the film is decently scary. Yes the film shows us the controversial other world known as “The Further” and it's something as a viewer you must accept or reject. It's as well done as it ever could be. In fact it's way better than how it was portrayed in the recent “Poltergeist” redo. I really enjoy the continuing story of this series. I can't vouch for how necessary a fourth entry would be but Wan and Whannell have started and continued to make a great mark in the horror genre. Fans of the original film shouldn’t have too much to complain about here. And for the record, the final shot of the film scared the ever loving piss out of me. GRADE: B

Trailer for Insidious: Chapter 3 on TrailerAddict.

The Woman with the Golden Gun: “Spy” is a Surprisingly Funny Action Comedy

“Spy” could have easily gone either way. To be honest, I was originally predicting an atrocious “Paul Blart” level piece of crap especially after Paul Feig’s last film “The Heat” failed to capture the same comedic highs as his modern classic “Bridesmaids.” Not that there was much necessarily bad about “The Heat,” though I had generally mixed feelings about the mix of comedy and action. That kind of thing isn’t always successful. Luckily, his latest endeavor is a real highlight being a sort female James Bond-like comedic adventure. It’s a formula that should feel worn out, stale, and just plain overdone but somehow it all works thanks mostly to the continued comedic brilliance of Melissa McCarthy and Rose Byrne in yet another showcase supporting role.

No one would ever believe Melissa McCarthy as a lethal CIA field agent so when “Spy” opens she’s just Susan Cooper, an office worker who literally works in the rodent-infested basement of the CIA. She’s in the earpiece of field agent Bradley Fine (Jude Law in a rare comedic role) giving him directions as he shoots, runs, and does other spy movie things. However, after a tragedy occurs Susan convinces her boss, played by Allison Janney, that she should go into the field to find a deadly arms dealer, as she’s one of the few agents the bad guys have never laid eyes on. She’s given the corny “secret identity” of a permed loser (and then one of a crazy cat lady) as she’s assigned to observe. Of course, one thing leads to another and she’s eventually interacting with the villainous Rayna Boyanov (Byrne) who is Susan’s number one enemy.

For an action comedy, there’s actually a lot of plot in “Spy” and many twists and turns that was difficult to see coming. Feig, who is the sole credited writer here, actually has crafted a decent screenplay even if his direction could have been slightly tighter (the film perhaps goes on a few minutes too long). Although for a guy known for directing comedies has some surprisingly decent action and fight scenes. The real highlight there though is the chemistry between McCarthy and Byrne which has been apparent since their appearance in “Bridesmaids.” 

McCarthy is a truly gifted comedian. She gives Susan just the right amount of emotional depth and you can actually believe her transition from desk job to field agent even if the movie is genuinely silly and filthy at times. Byrne, complete with supervillain accent (probably not far from her real life inflection) simply shines and plays off wonderfully with her co-stars. Another highlight is action man Jason Statham, spoofing his macho man image to great effect here as a rogue, rival colleague of Susan’s.  If anything, the only part of the film that didn’t quite work was Susan’s co-worker Nancy (British comedian Miranda Hart) whose jokes mostly fell sort of flat. It was obvious they were trying to copy Rebel Wilson’s weird British roommate from “Bridesmaids” but are not nearly as successful.

Overall, “Spy” is an outstanding action comedy. Anyone who’s even the slightest fan of any of these actors would be doing themselves a favor and checking out this funny romp. Feig actually proves he can direct both action and comedy (and write for that matter) even if his editing skills aren’t always up to task. McCarthy is a comic genius and in the right hands and script, as she’s proved time and time again, is simply a comedic force to be reckoned with. Enough so, that the announced female-driven “Ghostbusters” seems to be a better idea as time goes by.  GRADE: B+

Theatrical Trailer for Spy on TrailerAddict.

The Magnificent Seven: The Action-Packed “Furious Seven” Fires on All Cylinders

How many film franchises can boast that their seventh entry is actually the best? Of course, when the first film in your series is “The Fast & the Furious” that’s not really saying all that much. However, “Furious Seven” the SIXTH sequel in this mindbogglingly successful franchise is actually the most well-rounded, epic, entertaining, and satisfying as anything that came before it. The series really has done a complete 180. It started out as a lame street racing drama and has become a must-see series of action-packed heist and James Bond-esque spy thrillers that are merely shadows of its rocky beginnings.

Horror director James Wan, hot off the success of his “Insidious” films and “The Conjuring” goes a completely route by tackling his first action film. He brings a fresh eye to the series but the film maintains the same sense of absurdity and state-of-the art stunt and effects that fans of these films crave. There are more fights, crashes, and ridiculousness to fill three films. Dominic Toretto (Vin Diesel) and his “family” return but this time he’s back in the US living a quiet retired life. That is, until Jason Statham’s Deckard Shaw shows up to get revenge for his brother (the villain from the previous movie). Another mysterious character known as Mr. Nobody shows up who needs help finding a kidnapped computer hacker who can hack into a God-like computer system that can find the location of anyone in the world. If Dominic and his team can retrieve the hacker then Mr. Nobody will let him use the program to track down Shaw.

What comes next is nothing short of crazy, thrilling, and completely ludicrous set pieces involving dropping vehicles out of planes and cars driving through buildings INTO other buildings. Things like physics and gravity never seem to be an issue. The filmmakers know that by now the fans crave this stuff and have certainly upped the ante on crazy stunts and fights. Oh the fights. There are too many to count. In one two characters tussle as they are flying down stairs on a broken door. Another is one of those female-on-female fights so we know that woman can fight just as good as men. If you’re willing to turn your brain off and just take in the action you’re guaranteed to enjoy it. It’s all utterly crazy to the point of being practically comical and you chuckle in spite of yourself. But the thing is: it’s all very well done. You have to hand it to Wan and his crew; everything is expertly staged for maximum enjoyment and suspense. There’s nary a dull moment to be had and the film has a breathtaking use of various striking locations from the deserts of Abu Dhabi to the mountains of Eastern Europe. And I mean they literally drive their cars down mountains and off cliffs. Did I mention it’s ridiculous?

Odds are you’ve decided already if “Furious Seven” is a movie worth seeing. As someone pretty new to the franchise I really dug it. I’m amazed at how the series has developed over time. The fifth film really reinvented itself as a heist thriller and here the film goes all spy thriller. It’s “Mission: Impossible” with more cars. These films, as written by series regular Chris Morgan, have never been about thoughtful dialogue, and as corny as they can be at times you do get a sense that these characters and the actors who play them are indeed “family.” The ensemble is pretty solid. The film, which easily overcomes a possible icky factor due to the real-life death of lead Paul Walker, also plays terrific tribute to its lost star in a way that is fitting and tasteful. Even with all the previously witnessed explosions, fights, crashes, and extreme death toll, the film ends on a well-earned emotional note that is brilliantly handled.  GRADE: A- 

Revised Trailer for Furious 7 on TrailerAddict.

The Fault in Our Stars: The Dumb but Fun “San Andreas” is a Rockin' Disaster Epic

Is it impossible to make a disaster film without relying on the overused “I have to get to my [insert family member here]!” storyline? Movies like "The Day After Tomorrow," "Dante's Peak," "Volcano," and even the Oscar-nominated “The Impossible” all follow the basic premise of some kind of terrible event that separates the characters and them eventually being reunited. And there can be only one rational explanation: no one gives a crap about the actual plot of disaster films. You can count me among them. Give me your cliched disaster situations, dumb-as-stumps characters, and whatever other lame attempts at a storyline you can come up with; if it's an epic scale disaster film I don't even care. It's cinematic junk food at its best; and this being a post-9/11 world, the genre has mostly been seen as un-PC. Having said all that, “San Andreas” is one of the best disaster films I've seen in quite some time. It may actually be one of the best ones since “Twister.” And it's the only disaster film having to do strictly with earthquakes since 1974's appropriately titled “Earthquake.”

And at least this time we don't have to sit for an hour being introduced to boring characters before the rumbling starts. We're introduced to boring characters and the money shots begin almost immediately. The star of the film is Dwayne Johnson who is Ray, a firefighter/helicopter pilot who is recently separated from his wife Emma, played by Carla Gugino. They have a daughter Blake (Alexandra Daddario) who's entering college. Yes, the college girl from “Son-in-Law” is now old enough to be the mother of a college student. The three characters are separated, a massive earthquake hits, as predicted by seismologist Lawrence Hayes (Paul Giamatti) who has the all-important task of explaining to the audience what's happening scientifically.

Since Ray appears to be one of the more selfish emergency responders he insists in going after his wife and daughter before helping any of the millions of people currently being crushed, engulfed, or swallowed by the violently shaking earth. Ray sets out in his helicopter first for his wife and then for his daughter who was helped by a young British guy who caught her eye and his younger brother. The trio set out to find a location where Blake's dad is sure to find them. I'll let you guess whether they eventually all miraculously meet up amongst the sheer chaos.

Alright enough about the simply, preposterous and unoriginal plot line as conceived by story writers Andre Fabrizio and Jeremy Passmore. We have former Lost writer Carlton Cuse to blame for corny lines of dialogue like, “It's been a long time since I got you to second base” after Ray and his wife parachute onto a baseball field. But forget all that. This movie is simply 100% disaster flick entertainment. The special effects are pretty spectacular if not always totally convincing. The film is actually rather intense as proved by the small child sitting near me who almost had a heart attack. “San Andreas” sort of hits all of the standard beats but it does it all so well and is very well staged by director Brad Peyton who I won't embarrass by stating his previous filmography.

“San Andreas” is the best kind of dumb fun you can have at the movies. None of the corny or cliched moments take away from how glorious the disaster sequences really are. It brought me back to when first saw “Twister” and being amazed by what was happening on screen and not caring about the film's thin or ludicrous story. The film doesn't rely on a large Irwin Allen-like supporting cast so we don't have to jump back and forth between characters we don't really care about. And the actors here really aren't all that bad – I’m disturbed to say that “The Rock” is, in fact, not a terrible actor. If you want to see an out-and-out fun disaster epic and one thankfully not too long (like the similar “2012”), “San Andreas” will certainly fit the bill.  GRADE: B+

Trailer for San Andreas on TrailerAddict.

Ghostblunder: The Disappointing “Poltergeist” Redo is Rather Unremarkable

In the original 1982 film “Poltergeist” real skeletons were allegedly used in the pool sequence. Real as in actual human remains. They were apparently cheaper than the plastic ones. In the remake of “Poltergeist” they don't even use prop skeletons; they're made in the computer and are not very convincing. Of course, the original series of films was apparently “cursed” after several cast members passed away after shooting the movies. The new cast could only be so lucky.

There's actually nothing truly wrong or extremely bad about the new “Poltergeist.” It's just that in a world where movies like “Insidious” and “Paranormal Activity” and “The Conjuring” (which may be one of the best haunted house movies since "Poltergeist") exist it feels a bit redundant to redo a movie that inspired all of the above. The film pays tribute to the original film by reenacting memorable moments: the tree, the clown, the bent silverware, etc. The film hardly does anything new, transcendent, or creative with the material; material that was pretty much perfect from the get-go.

When remakes of well-liked movies happen it's usually because it would be interesting to see that story with modern effects – for example, “King Kong” a rare remake done right. The redo even won an Oscar for those impressive new effects. The original “Poltergeist” was nominated for three Oscars including for it's visual effects. Are 2015 computer effects more impressive than what could be accomplished in the 80s? Generally, yes. But you know what's really missing? Creativity. Nowadays a computer can show an audience anything. In 1982 it was way more impressive (and in terms of horror, shocking), which is why nothing that director Gil Kenan (a damning directing gig if there ever was one) throws in front of us is even remotely scary, cool-looking, or generally impressive even by modern standards.

The new cast includes Sam Rockwell and Rosemarie DeWitt as the heads of the Bowen family. They move into a new house and quickly notice some strange phenomenon. Can we retire the cliché of a family moving into a new house only to discover it's actually haunted? That would be great. Like in the original film they have three kids: a teenage daughter, a young song, and the youngest daughter. Of all the actors, I was most impressed with Kyle Catlett as the middle child Griffin who gets an entire story arc all to his self, even if it's contradicting (the film opens up with him playing a violent zombie video game and then presents him as being afraid of everything). The youngest daughter, named Maddy here instead of the reusing the iconic name Carol Anne, is again the one who the ghosts make contact with and then kidnap. And instead of diminutive psychic Tangina we get Jared Hess doing his own reality TV host version which feels uninspired and uninteresting. Jane Adams is good as a fellow paranormal researcher who helps investigate. The new script by “Rabbit Hole” writer David Lindsay-Abaire even controversially shows us the ghostly other world: and it's more yawn inducing than sacrilegious. Hands down the best new sequence in the film involves a power drill.

The original “Poltergeist” may not be the best movie of all time, far from it, but it's a classic of the horror genre and was a terrific summer movie blockbuster. It was an event - until E.T. came along a week later at least. Nothing about this new film feels even remotely as important or awe-inspiring. It's missing that sense of Spielbergian wonder that was so prevalent in the original film most people argue the man even directed it. There's nothing really wrong with the film – the actors are good at least and it's not nearly the trainwreck that is “Poltergeist III” – but there's nothing memorable about the look of the film or even it's music, two more areas where the original has this film beat. Not to mention the fact that nothing in the film is truly that scary if you're over the age of 12 (the scariest thing in the movie is probably a squirrel).  If you're a fan of the 1982 version and you have any sense of apprehension towards this new one it's probably best to just steer clear. As they say, stay away from the light.   GRADE: C  

Trailer for Poltergeist on TrailerAddict.

Fast & Furiosa: The Superb “Mad Max: Fury Road” is a Ridiculously Entertaining Thrill Ride

I’ve always had a theory that sequels to well-loved movie franchises that get made many years later are rarely, if ever, successful. “Mad Max: Fury Road” has proven me wrong. Not only is it an amazing sequel but it completely bests each and every film that came before it. The “Mad Max” post-apocalyptic Australian film series from director George Miller is an cult trilogy that has aged poorly though all the films have one positive thing in common: simply outstanding stunt work and car chases. Could you imagine if The Road Warrior has been made today? Well now we can with the release of “Fury Road” – and strap in because it is one ludicrous and thrilling ride filled with jaw-dropping camerawork, effects, and production value that completely blows the original films out of the water.

This fourth entry has very little setup and that’s fine: all you need to know is that it takes place in a post-apocalyptic world where water and gasoline are hot and rare commodities. Max (Tom Hardy, taking over Mel Gibson’s role) is still mad as ever and has a touch of the crazies as anyone would living in this stylishly produced desert wasteland. In the film’s opening moments his kidnapped by a bunch of equally crazy guys known as the War Boys who work for their leader Immortan Joe (Hugh Keays-Byrne) a wild-eyed masked villain with a Darth Vadar-like voice. He attempts to escape as trucker Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron) goes on a mission with her tanker to retrieve gasoline… though she has ulterior motives which sets off the film’s entire plot into motion: a kick-ass car chase that hardly lets up for a minute. Max and Furiosa, each apprehensive, eventually team up forming one of cinema’s greatest action duos of recent memory. And throw in Nicholas Hoult as a morally questioning War Boy Nux for good measure.

Yeah that’s basically it. You get almost two hours of crazy vehicles chasing each other through the desert and it’s all utterly amazing. The 70 year-old Miller (who’s last three films were Babe: Big in the City, Happy Feet, and Happy Feet Two) sits confidently behind the camera giving us dizzying shot after dizzying shot of explosions and automotive mayhem that Michael Bay couldn’t on dream of conceiving.  Cinematographer John Seale (also in his 70s) was coaxed out of retirement. The guy is no stranger to shooting in deserts, having won an Oscar for lensing “The English Patient” but his work his groundbreaking. Miller employs mostly practical effects with real stunt people performing at high speeds. We’re talking crazy stuff here like crazy guys wielding chainsaws and flaming throwing guitars. It’s also so… Australian. It’s like Baz Luhrmann wanted to make an action thriller or something.

With all the frenetic action and amazing stunt set pieces, there’s actually a lot going on emotionally as well. The film has a strong feminist element which never felt forced and gives the story, which essentially a long chase, real gravitas. The performances are also wonderful, especially Theron who has found her Ripley role as Furiosa. Hardy makes a great action hero grunting along the way though his bad boy looks feel strange opposite all of the bizarre make-up and costume design. This is such a fascinating world Miller and team has created and everything here is simply top notch and beautifully conceived and produced. And it’s all given a heartbeat with a simply amazing, pulse-pounding score from electronic musician Tom Holkenborg (who goes by the stage name Junkie XL).

“Mad Max: Fury Road” is a complete assault on the senses in the best way possible. It’s a dazzling piece of big-budget action filmmaking. It feels like something so different from what came before it and yet it feels like a nature step in the Mad Max cannon. It may just have a simple point A to point B plot, but there just isn’t anything else out there like it. See it and you’ll never drive the same way again!  GRADE: A

Feature Trailer for Mad Max: Fury Road on TrailerAddict.

Artful Intelligence: “Ex Machina” is a Stand Out Sci-Fi Thriller

There have been countless films that deal with artificial intelligence. “Ex Machina” is yet another one. And yet in a time where not many films truly feel original, “Ex Machina” manages the difficult task of showing us something we haven't seen before while not forgetting all that came before. The difference is that the film is a superbly crafted little thriller. It's focus is more on characters than it's effects, which actually works to its benefit because what little effects there is are simply amazing. And of course, like most films in this genre, the less said about the plot the better.

When Stanley Kubrick died back in 1999 he had started planning on directing “A.I. Artificial Intelligence” which was eventually directed by Steven Spielberg. What resulted was somewhat of a beautiful mess. A film with conflicting outlooks and a sort of uneven story. I truly feel “Ex Machina” is what Kubrick might have made had he lived long enough to tell a story about artificial intelligence.

We're introduced to computer programmer Caleb (Domhnall Gleeson) who is whisked away to meet his genius boss who lives isolated in a large sterile high-tech research facility, seemingly alone. He's taken via helicopter. There's he finally meets Nathan (Oscar Isaac) who is as brilliant as he is an alcoholic. Nathan tells Caleb that he's created an AI that is seemingly human and wants him to take part in research tests with it. Ava (Alicia Vikander) is a magnificent creation who moves, looks, and acts like a real human woman. Only the metal pieces and wires running through her arms, lets, and torso give her away as a robot. Ava is not only a magnificent creation but she's a technical wonder cinematically speaking. The special effects that bring this character to life are nothing short of amazing. It's truly a technological breakthrough as Ava is a stunning visual effect.

The film then presents us with segments in which Caleb and Ava interact – with Nathan, somewhat creepily, observing via cameras. Writer and director Alex Garland, making his directorial debut (and frequently collaborating with Danny Boyle), has crafted his film much like a play: there really are only a few characters and most scenes consist of conversations between Caleb and Ava and then between Caleb and Nathan. As the sessions go on Ava appears to have a connection with Caleb and the audience doesn't quite know where the film is headed, but the film has an overall sense of doom and gloom: something bad is definitely coming. Nathan is an interesting character – he's obviously intelligent but has serious flaws which are easily exploited by Caleb who suspects there's something Nathan isn't sharing with him. To say anymore would do a disservice to the viewer.

Garland has made a stunning first film. His bizarre sci-fi touches, which he's injected into all of his projects from 28 Days Later to Sunshine are clearly present. He's obviously heavily influenced by films that came before it like “Blade Runner” and the aforementioned “A.I.” The film is a simple one: one setting, few characters, not much action, but it's slower pace is a purposeful and suspenseful build up. It has interesting characters with great performances and truly spectacular visual effects. This is a great modern sci-fi film and anyone who's a fan of the genre would be doing themselves a favor by checking out this stunning movie.GRADE: A-

Theatrical Trailer for Ex Machina on TrailerAddict.

The A Team: Marvel is at it Again in “Avengers: Age of Ultron

 The arrival of “Avengers: Age of Ultron” brings mixed emotions within me. I'm happy to report that the film is completely solid and entertaining. It stands up with other great Marvel adventures (though not quite as good as Guardians or Winter Soldier) and yet I can't help but feel a bit of comic book movie fatigue. Though moments after watching the film I realized that until Marvel delivers a complete and utter trainwreck of a film, what they're doing is actually pretty great. With so many films in such a short period of time they do begin to blend together but as each one shows itself in the local multiplex they consistently prove their worthy of being a worthy and entertaining entry in a canon of films unlike anything anyone has really seen before.

Overall, I really did like “Avengers: Age of Ultron” even if I didn’t quite get every moment of it. Because of this “cinematic universe” the film really does rely a lot on what you've seen before and that extends beyond the theater – Marvel has two TV shows airing on ABC, neither of which I've watched. Anyone expecting continuing plot elements from the shockers in the second Captain America film will likely be disappointed. The film opens with a battle with the superheros battling the Hydra organization, and after Tony Stark's Ultron defense system goes self-aware and hell bend on destroying humanity are soon whisked away into hiding where they recuperate and strategize. It seems in the ensuing battle Hulk goes on a rampage (obviously) and the public isn't too pleased with the mayhem. I'm not sure I quite get the Hulk's role in this group but I digress.

There are other specific plot elements about glowing CGI stones and a random romance between Natasha (Scarlett Johansson) and Bruce (Mark Ruffalo) the former of which will become even more important down the road. Finally Thor (Chris Hemsworth) describes the “infinity stones” to the group and tells of their importance. The real highlight here however is how large a role Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) and Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) have here as this feels more like an Iron Man or Captain American sequel more than anything. I've never personally had much interest in the S.H.I.E.L.D. organization and since being overrun by Hydra there isn't much screentime devoted to it.

And what of the many new characters writer/director Joss Whedon has given us? They're all pretty solid. Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) are initially on the side of the evil robot/humanoid Ultron (voiced by James Spader) but we all know they eventually join the Avengers, right? One of the more interesting developments includes the introduction of “Vision” who sounds exactly like Tony's AI companion JARVIS and for good reason. Whedon's script surprisingly balances the new characters, older characters in a surprisingly funny (the gang trying to pick up Thor's hammer is a standout) and action-packed film that never feels overlong.

There's a lot going on in “Avengers Age of Ultron” and it sometimes feels like a buildup to something even greater but it never really feels bloated and never outstay its welcome. I enjoyed the first Avengers film back when it was first released but never found myself going back to it. This one feels different somehow, though it never quite feels transcendent. It doesn't quite reach the level of “Guardians of theGalaxy” or “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” but fans of all the Marvel films in general won't be disappointed.  GRADE: B+  

d

Feature Trailer for Avengers: Age of Ultron on TrailerAddict.

They Came Together: Indie “It Follows” is Overall a Creepy, Stylish Thriller

“It Follows” is one of the more original horror films to be released in some time. Though is anything truly original these days? Of course not. It's obviously influenced by past classics such as “Halloween” and “A Nightmare on Elm Street” and even a bit of of “The Ring” thrown in. It wins points for sheer style and its overwhelming urge to be a tribute to great horror films that came before it. It features a synth-heavy 80s film score, 70s style camerawork, and a clever premise with some decent frights and good tension. It turns out that horror films with simple but effective premises are the most successful and "It Follows" fits the bill.

The film stars Maika Monroe, coming off the similarly retro “The Guest,” as Jay who seems like a normal girl. She's close with her sister, has some close friends, and is dating an older guy and she'd ready to take it to the next level. Everything seems perfect until she finds out that this guy just passed along a curse that is passed through sexual activity. Remember how the slasher films of the 80s basically insisted that after having sex you have to die? This is literally the premise of “It Follows.” It seems that once you're “inflicted” some kind of supernatural force follows you until you die. Moral of the story? Keep it in your pants, kids.

Jay doesn't know if she's just crazy or if there really is some evil being following her. She gets help from her friends, and the guy across the street who appears to suspiciously resemble young Johnny Depp, who also lived across the street from the heroine of “A Nightmare on Elm Street.” Jay even sees a person staring at her while she's in class ala Laurie in “Halloween.” The film is an obvoius ode to these older films just take a listen to that retro soundtrack provided by Disasterpiece that wouldn't be out of place in an early John Carpenter film. Even the film's unknown setting feels very much like it's set in the past (which I assume it is, though Jay's friend uses a deceivingly futuristic touchscreen reading device in a clam shell, just one of the film's many mysteries). The young cast is pretty decent and likable even if they're not all that memorable; at least they seem relatively real.

I really enjoyed the retro feel of the film, which like the must-see “House of the Devil,” feels like part of a new group of modern indie horror films that defy genre classification. It also helps that the film is decently creepy and wholly atmospheric. I even jumped a few times. The pace sort of meanders a bit in the second half and I can't say I agree with some of the choices some characters make but otherwise I rather enjoyed “It Follows.” I like and appreciate what writer/director David Robert Mitchell has given us. It's obvious he understands and enjoys the genre and wants to give fans something they haven't quite seen before, even if it's a little rough around the edges. He does seem to care about music cues and overly stylized camerawork than about writing memorable characters but that's to be expected. At least he also cares about his film being scary. “It Follows” doesn't quite feel like a game changer the way “Scream” was nearly twenty years ago, but this usually under-appreciated genre is at least heading in the right direction.  GRADE: B

  

Trailer for It Follows on TrailerAddict.