Jun 27, 2014

"Transformers: Age of Extinction" Review

Transformers: Age of Extinction

2.5 out of 5 stars

Family appropriateness rating: 3 out of 5 stars
-Action violence throughout, mostly between robots.
-A man is shown falling to his death
-Mild gore from a large gun wound in a dead man's chest
-Moderate amount of language including one censored f-word and one uncensored.
-One or two instances of sexual innuendo that would go over kids' heads.







With an interesting concept about government conspiracy, "Transformers: Age of Extinction" has so much potential to be really good, but it falls short.

Following the near-destruction of Chicago during "Dark of the Moon," both Autobots and Decepticons are in trouble. They are being hunted down and eliminated by American black ops forces.

Many are in hiding, including Optimus Prime (voiced by Peter Cullen), who is disguised as a junky, old semi. He is found by Cade Yeager (Mark Wahlberg), an inventor in Texas who is struggling financially. After finding out that what he brought home is a Transformer, he does what he can to fix it. The CIA gets word of this, and the black ops team goes to Yeager's house to take Optimus Prime away.

This sets off a chain of events that leads Cade, his daughter Tessa (Nicola Peltz) and her boyfriend Shayne (Jack Reynor) to help Optimus Prime find out what is going on. It turns out there are some corrupt people behind the hunt for Transformers. They have their own motivations, but they do everything in the name of the country's security.

I like this aspect because it is perfectly relevant to certain events that have come about recently. It has been revealed over the last few years that the National Security Agency has had access to personal information of law-abiding citizens. Government officials insist that it is for he safety of everyone, but there is a lot of discussion as to whether or not that is the full truth.

This aspect is carried out by the two antagonists: Joshua Joyce (Stanley Tucci) and the Harold Attinger (Kelsey Grammer). Joyce is an entrepreneur and perfectionist who does not understand the power he is dealing with. Attinger is a cold, threatening man who leads the CIA. Both performances are the best part of the film. They are strong actors who are able to make their characters interesting to watch.

The government conspiracy angle is only discussed a little bit. Once the plot picks up, the focus goes to robots fighting, people running and a ridiculous amount of things blowing up in ridiculously huge explosions. There is nothing wrong with action in films, but sometimes it becomes the entire movie, and that is not how it should be.

Director Michael Bay could have redeemed this by trimming it down quite a bit. The run time is two hours and 45 minutes. Most of it is either action or a superfluous plot point. There are entire sections that could have been cut out, and the movie would have been much better.

As it stands, it is difficult to care about what is going on after about one and a half hours. At about that point, my mind started wandering, wishing the film would wrap up so I can go on with my day. A good movie should not do that. If the director decides to make it very lengthy, there better be a lot of depth and character development. That is not how this movie is.

For the most part, the characters are just there to drive the action along. There was potential for some good development. The beginning sets up the father-daughter relationship well enough to create a very intense moment in which Cade fears for Tessa's life. After that, however, little is done with the protagonists.

Like my page on Facebook: www.facebook.com/criticalchristopher
Follow me on Twitter: @ChrisCampbell02

Jun 19, 2014

"Jersey Boys" Review

Jersey Boys

3.5 out of 5 stars

Family appropriateness rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars
Rated R
-Strong language throughout the film including the f-word
-Some sexual references, but nothing very descriptive
-No nudity or sex scenes
-Mild violence









Despite a weak third act, "Jersey Boys" utilizes a unique, play-like style and excellent music to tell its story in an entertaining way.

The film is the true story of the rise and fall of a group of singers known as the Four Seasons, whose lead is Frankie Valli (John Lloyd Young). It starts off in a New Jersey neighborhood where Valli grew up. He is a younger man who really looks up to Tommy DeVito  (Vincent Piazza) the alpha male of the neighborhood. DeVito is not a very good role model, often roping Frankie into his illegal shenanigans.

Frankie is an amazing singer who is very good at hitting high-pitched, falsetto notes. Due to certain circumstances, Tommy lets Frankie join his music trio, which is also comprised of his friend Nick Massi (Michael Lomenda).

All three of them know that in order to get out of their New Jersey neighborhood, they need to become famous. The problem with this is trios are not in very high demand, so they hire a fourth man named Bob Gaudio (Erich Bergen), a virgin who is quite a bit smarter than Tommy, which really annoys the alpha-male.

Most of the first act deals with Frankie's relationship with Tommy. They are distinctly different characters. Frankie at the beginning is a somewhat innocent boy and Tommy is an overly confident man who does not seem as invested in his future. It is interesting to see how their roles get reversed by the end of the second act. While they are poor, Tommy's actions are adaptive, but that is not the case as they get older and more successful.

The dialogue is often very witty especially on the part of Tommy. In the beginning, he says a line about the different types of women. While it is probably a little on the misogynistic side, it is very funny coming from the character. There are a lot of other great moments of dialogue that establish the characters -- especially in the first act -- including one set on a date between Frankie and Mary (Renée Marino), the woman who becomes his wife.

Throughout the film, certain characters talk in monologues as a way to tell exposition. At first this is a little strange, but it adds to the play-like quality of the film. With differing, realistic sets, this is definitely a movie adaptation. However, the script feels like something that is performed on stage. This aspect makes the movie unique and even more fun to watch.

Once the second act starts, it is more about how the group rises to fame. This is when most of the songs are played as the group comes up with new ones. While this is the most entertaining part of the film, it fails to show how some of the important relationships have been changing. It does a good job showing confusion being caused by Tommy, but it does not do that until near the end of the second act. Furthermore, the Nick character is never fleshed out enough to where I really care about him, and some of the things he does end up being very important in the end.

Another important thing that needed more development is the relationship between Frankie and Mary. The audience sees them get married, but after that, there is very little about it until near the end. Frankie's family life becomes such an important part of the third act, but because there is very little set up in the beginning, it is very hard to feel what is going on.

The music throughout the film is phenomenal. It is comprised mostly of older songs that most people already know. However, seeing it performed on the big screen in the style that it was directed is worth seeing.

Director Clint Eastwood does a great job getting a "Godfather" feel with a combination of lighting and acting. A lot of the cinematography is dark and moody like the classic trilogy, and the actors do a great job carrying out the mannerisms of Italian-Americans from New Jersey.*

Every actor does an excellent job in this film. The one that stands out the most is Vincent Piazza as Tommy. He pulls off the uncontrollable alpha-male role very well. John Lloyd Young also does a great job giving off a Michael Corleone vibe.

Though she is not in it very much, Renée Marino deserves to be mentioned. This is her debut role, and she does a very good job with what she has. I would not mind seeing her in more films.

While it has its share of problems, the witty dialogue, excellent acting and catchy music make "Jersey Boys" worth the price of admission.

Like my Facebook page: www.facebook.com/criticalchristopher
Follow me on Twitter: @ChrisCampbell02

*Just so everyone who might be offended knows, this film is not "The Godfather," but it is obvious that Eastwood was at least partially inspired by it. Also, I do realize that the classic film is set in New York. I was talking more about the heritage aspect than the location.

Jun 13, 2014

"How to Train Your Dragon 2" Review

How to Train Your Dragon 2

4 out of 5 stars

Family appropriateness rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars
Rated PG
-Mild violence. Any potential gore is off-screen and left to the imagination.
-Some images may be frightening to some children.
-I think there might be a brief reference to prostitution, but I may have hear wrong.








Though not as good as the first one, "How to Train Your Dragon 2" carries the characters forward and uses impressive visuals to expand the universe.

It has been five years since the events of the first film, when the vikings of Berk decided that dragons are not evil creatures like they had thought. Now, the vikings use them to ride and play sports.

The hero from the first movie, Hiccup (Jay Baruchel), is as adventurous as ever. Now that it is safe to openly ride his dragon without fear of the townspeople finding out, he uses the ability of flight to explore the world and see what more it has to offer than his little island. While doing this, he stumbles upon some dragon trappers who work for Drago (Djimon Hounsou), an evil man with the power to control dragons.

When Hiccup tells his father, Stoick (Gerard Butler)  the chief of Berk  about the encounter, the viking leader commands the townspeople to prepare for an attack. Hiccup and his father butt heads about what to do. Stoick just wants to defend the city, but Hiccup wants to try negotiating with Drago so there would not be an all-out war. Going against his father's demands, the hero runs away from Berk to talk with the leader of the dragon trappers.

In the first film, Hiccup learns a lot about tolerance towards other creatures. He learns that everything he had been taught about dragons is wrong, and they are actually gentle animals. In this film, his character grows even more. The writers were able to use some good moments of high conflict to illustrate that he needs to become more responsible. At first, his decisions seem irrational, but that is the intention of the writing. They are not very good decisions, and he learns from his mistakes.

The animation is just as breathtaking as the first film. It is still obviously animated, but the details make it look as real as possible. Not only that, it is aesthetically pleasing to watch. One of the best scenes is near the beginning when Hiccup is first shown riding his dragon, Toothless. It is very smooth, and the movie would have been fine had it just shown that for one and a half hours.

It is necessary for the animation to be as good as possible because this movie expands the universe very well. All of the characters in the first film are based in Berk. However, this one deals with characters from different lands. The writers and animators together do a great job making the world bigger.

The main problem with this film is it tries really hard to entertain young children with jokes that are pretty cliché for G and PG movies. There are some genuinely hilarious moments, but there are others  particularly when dealing with Hiccup's obnoxious friends — that seem forced and take me out of the movie.

While the villain is pretty cool, I was slightly disappointed with him. The movie really does all it can to make him as threatening as possible, and it succeeds for the most part. However, I was expecting something as iconic as Lord Voldemort from the amount of buildup he got. Characters constantly play him up to be this horrible, ruthless man. This is true, but I was personally expecting something more.

This film is not as good as the first "How to Train Your Dragon," but it would be incredibly difficult to top it. While the ending of that film leaves it open for a sequel, it was never absolutely necessary. However, for fans of the 2010 film, this movie is worth seeing.

Jun 12, 2014

"The Fault in Our Stars" Review

The Fault in Our Stars

4.5 out of 5 stars

Family appropriateness rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars
Rated PG-13
-A moderate amount of language including one f-word
-A moderate amount of sexual content
-One scene of sensuality. The characters take off their clothes. The girl takes off her bra, which is shot from behind so nothing is seen. It shows the characters touching each other and kissing, but nothing beyond that.







"The Fault in Our Stars" seeks to find positivity in a world of harsh reality.

Hazel Lancaster (Shailene Woodley) is a teenager who has spent a big chunk of her life fighting cancer. She has only survived as long as she has because of a special medication that works for very few people. Her sickness has gotten so bad that she has to carry an oxygen tank around to aid her breathing.

She is a perfectly normal girl for her age. She has hopes and dreams for the future, or at least for what her future would be if she had one. It is depressing to her that she knows she is going to die, and there are a lot of things she may never experience. This is shown as she looks at couples in love. She does not think something like that will ever happen to her in the short time she has.

Despite Hazel's protests, her mother (Laura Dern) makes her join a support group for other cancer patients and survivors. It is there that she meets Augustus "Gus" Waters (Ansel Elgort). He is a quirky, highly positive young man. He survived a bout with cancer, but lost his leg in the process.

The movie beautifully shows the relationship develop between Hazel and Gus. At first, their chemistry seems a little off. Whenever Gus talks, he seems to be doing stand-up comedy for Hazel, who only finds his jokes mildly funny. That is because they are in the early stages of the relationship when they are flirty and not quite comfortable with each other. As the film goes on, they face certain challenges together, and their chemistry strengthens.

Through this relationship, both characters find that there are things to live for. They realize that everyone is going to die eventually. It will simply to happen earlier for them. While they are alive, they need to make the best of what they have.

A problem I initially had with this film is the bloated dialogue. The main characters are very young, but they talk about deep, complex philosophy. They seem way too smart for people their age. After thinking about it, I realized this must have been done on purpose. The characters have been so close to death, that all of the complexity of speech is simply them trying to figure their lives out.

This is especially true of the Gus character. Ansel Elgort is a very likable guy. His debut role was in the remake of Steven King's "Carrie," in which he plays another nice guy named Tommy Ross. He did an excellent job in that film, and I was looking forward to seeing what more he had. At first he seems too perfect in this movie, but he is this way because of his fear of dying without being remembered.

A while ago in my review for "Divergent," I wrote that Shailene Woodley did a pretty good job but she is not that great an actress. I take that back. She is great! She does perfectly as a witty teenage girl who is dying. This role requires a lot of emotional depth, and she pulls it off very well.

Another great performance is by Willem Dafoe. He is only in a couple scenes, but one of them is the strongest part of the film.

The only problem is the pacing. The section in which the main relationship develops drags a little. However, this is a minor flaw. The characters are interesting enough to keep it entertaining especially when the story picks up.

I recommend this movie to anyone who wants to see a romantic story done right. The characters are likable and the relationship is developed so well that it is easy to care about. Just be warned that it is a pretty sad movie. I may or may not have cried a little.

Like my Facebook page: www.facebook.com/criticalchristopher
Follow me on Twitter: @ChrisCampbell02

Jun 11, 2014

"22 Jump Street" Review

22 Jump Street

4.5 out of 5 stars

Family appropriateness rating: 2.3 out of 5 stars
Rated R
-Strong language throughout including the f-word in both sexual and non-sexual contexts.
-Some sexual content including shots of sex toys and naked blow-up dolls
-The official MPAA rating says there is brief nudity, but I do not recall any
-Some drug content including a portrayal of tripping
-Mild violence including gun shot wounds.





"22 Jump Street" takes the concept of the first film and keeps it fresh from beginning to end.

The film follows "21 Jump Street," which is a reboot of the 1987 television series. In it, Schmidt (Jonah Hill) and Jenko (Channing Tatum) are two cops who — after getting into trouble  are assigned to the Jump Street program, where they go undercover in a high school. There is a new drug going around, and they need to pose as regular students to find out who is selling it so they can find out who the supplier is.

"22 Jump Street" has the same premise but in college. It knows it is a sequel. It knows its limitations, and it points them out brilliantly. It does not do this by breaking the fourth wall like in "The Wolf of Wall Street" or by saying "Hey, we are in a movie" like all of the Muppet films. Instead, it utilizes a character to talk about it in terms of the "Jump Street program." Part of this aspect is revealed in the trailer, but there is still a lot more to it.

One of the things that the first film was praised for is it shows how different society has gotten over the last ten years in terms of "What's cool." It addresses the fact that the bullies and jocks used to be the ones who were incredibly popular, but there has since been a shift in culture. Now, it is socially acceptable to be different and nerdy. Furthermore, no one likes bullies anymore.

This film addresses the fact that college students have a much different mentality than high schoolers. The main characters have essentially the same task, but it is more difficult than it was the first time. That is because everyone is more intelligent. When Schmidt or Jenko ask any student about the new drug, they are met with suspicion because both of them look older. Those in college are smart enough to see through their façade. Not only is this interesting, it also keeps the story fresh by introducing additional conflict.

A lot of R rated comedies get most of their laughs from gross-out humor and tons of sexual references. Sometimes these are forced because since it is rated R, they can get away with just about anything. What is great about the Jump Street movies is they are not like that. There are some crude jokes, but the films do not rely on it. Most of the humor — and the overall entertainment value — comes from the relationship between the two main characters.

They are very different people. Schmidt is a smart, nerdy guy who is not very fit. Jenko is the polar opposite. He is as dumb as a stick of butter, but he has the physical prowess of Spider-Man. This film addresses these differences and even asks why they are such good friends. Not only does this create some good humor, it creates the necessary drama to keep the audience invested in the characters.

This friendship partly works out because of the tight chemistry between Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum. From an article I read (here) it seems they are good friends in real life. This translates well on screen. Every scene in which they are together is fun to watch.

There is a certain twist in this movie that is very well done. It is unexpected, and it is set up so well that it is both believable and wildly hilarious. It alone is worth the price of admission.

If you are a fan of the first film, go see this one. It has the same premise, but it is just as fun.

Like my Facebook page: www.facebook.com/criticalchristopher
Follow me on Twitter: @ChrisCampbell02

Jun 8, 2014

Netflix Recommendation: "Forrest Gump"

Forrest Gump

5 out of 5 stars

Family appropriateness rating: 2.75 out of 5 stars
Rated PG-13
-Mild violence including one war-time blood splatter.
-Moderate sexual content including one scene where a woman has a man touch her naked breast (shot from the back, a little bit of her breast can be seen when she takes off her bra).
-Partial backside female nudity.
-Moderate amount of language including one use of the f-word and another use of it partially cut off.






"Forrest Gump" is so inspirational that I wish it were based on a true story.

Tom Hanks plays Forrest Gump in an Academy Award winning performance. He is a man with some kind of mental condition sitting on a bench waiting for a bus. Most of the movie is set in that location as he tells other people his life's story.

The film spans a lot of years, a big chunk being in the 1960s. He does not seem to fully comprehend just how much is going on both socially and politically during that era, but it does not really matter. His ignorance, combined with his excellent work ethic assure him success in quite a few things including the military, the shrimping industry and even ping pong.

Though a lot of focus is spent on the success that seems to come naturally to him, it is mostly about how he touches the lives of several people including his childhood friend, Jenny (Robin Wright) and his military friends, Bubba (Mykelti Williamson) and Lieutenant Dan (Gary Sinise).

Every single one of these characters are well-developed, especially Jenny and Lieutenant Dan, who have definite definite character arcs. Even though Jenny is not in every scene, most of the film is about how she copes with her abusive childhood. She becomes a hippie, uses illegal drugs and gets into abusive relationships. Though she knows she could do much better with Forrest, she does not feel she deserves him.

Lieutenant Dan is a man who falls from grace after the Vietnam War. Despite his rudeness towards Forrest, the title character helps him become a better, more successful man. There is a religious message with Dan's story that is spiritual without being overly preachy.

Gump himself even has a character arc. Though he is very slow, he learns a lot through his experiences. His childhood is spent with his mother, who knows what his limitations are but believes he can do anything with his life. Her wisdom guides him in everything he does, and his experiences solidify what she teaches him.

Every scene is very entertaining. There is a lot of comedy that comes from both Forrest's innocent view of the world and his surprisingly sharp wit. However, this film also contains a lot of heart. The characters are so real, that it is easy to identify with them. One scene in particular made me cry.

"Forrest Gump" is currently streaming on Netflix. Whether or not you have seen it, it is definitely one to watch before it is taken off of the website.

Jun 6, 2014

"Edge of Tomorrow" Review

Edge of Tomorrow

4.5 out of 5 stars

Family appropriateness rating: 3.75 out of 5 stars
Rated PG-13
-One minor depiction of backside male nudity
-Two or three mild, non-descriptive, sexual references
-Mild amount of profanity including one instance of an incomplete f-word and a few shots of written profanity









With even pacing and a storyline that keeps the audience involved from beginning to end, "Edge of Tomorrow" is what I hoped "Elysium" would be.

Earth is being overtaken by a race of aliens known as mimics. The world's militaries have been losing their battles against them until recently, and they plan what is hoped to be a final attack in Europe. 

Tom Cruise plays Major Cage, an American military officer who has a very cushy job. Not a lot is described about his duties, but it seems like he is there for the public relations aspect of the war effort. Needless to say, he has never fought in any battles. 

Despite his protests, he is forced by higher officials to storm Europe with the other soldiers. The battle proves to be more of a slaughter as the mimics are killing off the humans. Major Cage dies in that battle only to wake up the day before. 

This happens again and again as he goes off to fight in the same battle. Eventually, he finds someone who knows what is going on and why: the war hero Rita (Emily Blunt). She also knows what it takes to win the war, and she uses Cage to do so.

From beginning to end, this film is very entertaining. This is due to a script that gives the audience an interesting character who has a satisfying arc. At the beginning, he is a total wuss, but he becomes braver as the story develops.

Tom Cruise made this possible. Say what you want about his personal life, he is a great actor. His performance is believable in this film. There are parts where he gets very frustrated with how things are turning out, and it is easy to empathize with the character.

The storyline is driven by the concept, which reminds me of "Groundhog Day." Not only is it an interesting thought, the writers were able to make it completely relevant. Unlike the Bill Murray film, the reason for Cage to relive every day is explained, and it has to do with what is going on in the war.

There were only two problems I had with this film. One of them is in the beginning, Cage seems to be demoted, and he is forced to fight in the war, but this aspect is never adequately explained. 

The other problem is the ending is a little too convenient. I will not reveal what happened, but it seemed like the writers wanted certain things to happen, so they happened without very much explanation.

These are very minor problems. The film as a whole is very entertaining. I definitely recommend seeing it.

Jun 1, 2014

"A Million Ways to Die in the West" Review

A Million Ways to Die in the West

3.5 out of 5 stars

Family appropriateness rating: 1.5 out of 5 stars
Rated R
-Strong language throughout including the f-word in both sexual and non sexual contexts
-A moderate of graphic gore
-A moderate amount of descriptive sexual content
-One scene of male backside nudity (only the buttocks)
-Two or three jokes involving visuals of sheep penises







"A Million Ways to Die in the West" delivers both a unique, comedic look at the frontier and a good, romantic story.

The film was directed by Seth MacFarlane, who also shares a writing credit and stars in it. He is most notable for the animated comedy series, "Family Guy," a show filled with crude, sophomoric humor. When I was in high school, I thought it was the most hilarious cartoon ever made. However, throughout the years, I have liked it less and less. While there are funny segments, it is mostly a pointless show with a majority of the jokes trying way too hard and stories that go nowhere.

Coming into this movie, I was worried that it would be two hours of nothing but "Family Guy" pointlessness. While some of the jokes are similar, it has its funny moments, and there is a point to the story. Furthermore, the concept itself makes the overall film enjoyable.

It is about a wimp named Albert (Seth MacFarlane), who lives in an old western frontier town. He is not good at fighting or shooting, and when he talks his way out of a gun fight, his girlfriend, Louise (Amanda Seyfried), dumps him.

When he is about to move to another town, he meets another girl, Anna (Charlize Theron), who is unhappily married to the dangerous outlaw, Clinch (Liam Neeson). As a way to make his ex-girlfriend jealous, Albert takes Anna to the town fair where they encounter Louise and her new boyfriend, Foy (Neil Patrick Harris), the self-absorbed owner of the town mustache care shop. There, Albert challenges Foy to a gun fight for Louise's love, and Anna helps him prepare for it.

The chemistry between Charlize Theron and Seth MacFarlane works. There is a relationship that develops, and I actually cared about it. The stereotypical gender roles are reversed. Anna is a tough girl who knows how to stand up for herself, and Albert is the exact opposite. Throughout the story, she pushes him to believe in himself and have more confidence. Ultimately, she makes him a better person.

Neil Patrick Harris is hilarious in this movie. He plays a monogamous version of his character on "How I Met Your Mother," and he even says one of his famous catch phrases from that show at one point. As a fan of the sit-com, I really liked that, but I hope he does not get type-casted for the rest of his career.

Liam Neeson is underused in this film, but when he is present, he does a great job as the villain. The scene that introduces his character is surprisingly intense. It strays from the comedic aspect of the film and establishes him as threatening.

As stated earlier, the humor is hit-and-miss. There are some parts that rely on being crude and try way too hard to get laughs. However, there are several scenes that do a great job. Some of them parody the fact that the old west is extremely dangerous. While a lot of them are shown in the trailer, the movie's R rating allows the scenes to show gore, which makes them funnier.

While "A Million Ways to Die in the West" is not the comedy event of the decade, it is built on a good premise and delivers enough laughable humor to make it worth seeing.

Like my Facebook page: www.facebook.com/criticalchristopher
Follow me on Twitter: @ChrisCampbell02