"Pitch Perfect 2" Review

Courtesy: IMDB.com

Pitch Perfect 2

3 out of 5 stars


Family appropriateness rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars
Rated PG-13
-Some mild language.
-Some of the jokes are about sex or body parts
-Some of the song lyrics are about sex










"Pitch Perfect 2" amps up much of what made the first film enjoyable. In some ways, this is a good thing, but in others, not so much.

The Barden Bellas are progressing. Instead of singing the same boring song, they perform creative mash-ups thanks to Beca (Anna Kendrick), who in the first film got the group to break out of its rigid mentality, and — much like an Apple commercial — to think different.

The fact that the characters are progressing is one thing this sequel has going for it. The main protagonists do not revert back to where they were at the beginning of the first "Pitch Perfect," and they end up in a different place as the film closes.

This is especially true of the Beca character. In this installment, she gets an internship and realizes the real world is not easy. She has doubts that her dreams can become a reality, and she spends much of the movie dealing with it. This plot point hits home for me because I am in the same boat as her. I too will be graduating college soon, and I am not entirely sure what I will do. I have big dreams, but I am concerned about whether or not they are realistic.

When I saw the first film, I thought it was decent, but it was overhyped by every girl in Utah. I saw it about five times the year it came out because people played it at most get-togethers. The film slightly disappointed me because there were not a lot of musical moments. The ones it had were good, but there were not enough. The second "Pitch Perfect" solves this problem by giving us more music. In that way, it is better than the first one. It finds every moment it can to add another song, and it has another, longer version of an a cappella battle.

Another aspect from the first film this movie amps up is the comedy, which does not work as well. Things happen in this film that are so ridiculous, they are unbelievable. The very premise of the story is Fat Amy rips her pants, revealing her private parts, during a performance in front of President Obama, and this causes so much controversy, the school threatens to break the Bellas up unless they can win the world a capella competition.

Not only does this joke take a little too much suspension of disbelief to buy, it sets the tone for a lot of other jokes in the film: forced and unfunny. I realize I am making it sound like the entire film is unwatchable. That is not the case. The the jokes are hit and miss. Some are funny and even quotable. There are certain lines I may repeat in future conversations.

The hyper-focus on humor puts the plot on back burner. I had to constantly remind myself that the characters want to win the world competition. By the time they either accomplish or fail (no spoilers), I honestly did not care very much.

Like my Facebook page: www.facebook.com/criticalchristopher

Follow me on Twitter: @ChrisCampbell02

"Mad Max: Fury Road" Review

Courtesy: IMDB.com

Mad Max: Fury Road

4 out of 5 stars


Family appropriateness rating: 2.25 out of 5 stars
Rated R
-Action violence throughout, some of it is bloody
-Some language including one f-word
-Some partial female nudity










Critics have raved about the new "Mad Max" film. It stands at a 98 percent on Rotten Tomatoes*. One of reviewers, Chris Stuckmann — who I have nothing but respect for — gave it an A+, which he rarely does unless the movie is really good. While "Max" will entertain you for the full two hours, it is slightly overrated**.

Tom Hardy plays a rebooted version of the title character, a vagabond living in a post-apocalyptic, lawless Australia. He travels alone, running from crazy people who drive suped-up vehicles through the desert. At one time, he served as a police officer because he wanted to help others. When he saw his efforts were in vain, he quit.

In this film, he gets captured by a group who work for the tyrannical Immortan Joe (Hugh Keays-Byrne, who also played the villain the first film more than 30 years ago). He rules over thousands of people by controlling their water source and uses a group of women to bear his children. When these "breeders" try to escape with the help of Immortan's most-prized driver, Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron), some of his henchmen take Max to recapture them.

This leads the character (and by association us as an audience) on an epic, sand-filled adventure with excellent stunts, beautiful cinematography and awesome music, some of which a guitarist plays on top of a vehicle with fire coming out of the instrument.

As you can see from my score, I thought the movie was really good, and I can see why other critics raved so much about it. The one I mentioned earlier, Chris Stuckmann, put out a video in which he gives a checklist for what action movies should have, and "Fury Road" satisfies every criterium in it. In a nutshell, he says a solid action flick needs to feature an un-recycled storyline (check), a hero who is both relatable and vulnerable (check), a well-defined villain (check), quality stunts done at least partially by the actors (check) and steady camerawork (check).


(Though I gave out the list, I would still recommend watching the video if you are a film fan. Stuckmann explains the reasoning behind his list, and it is interesting. Just a warning for those who care, this video contains some depictions of violence and brief strong language).

It is notable how this film handles the hero's motivation. Max struggles with the conflict between desire to help others and fear of failing to do so. This does not bog down the movie. It is shown just enough to illustrate the character as a human being and give him motivation for his actions: he appears to not care about others even though we as an audience know otherwise.

The only thing about this movie that may be classified as a problem is some of it looks sped up. This is something the director did on purpose, probably for an aesthetic feel. I personally was okay with it, but some people might not be, including the friend I saw it with. Other than that, the movie does everything it sets out to do: tell an interesting story while delivering some fast-paced action sequences.

I wrote that this film is overrated because that is how I feel about it. Coming into the theatre, I had so many expectations, having heard so many good things about it. I thought I would have — what I will start referring to as — "shout out loud" moments, or "sol" (fun fact: this also means "sun" in Portuguese). These are moments when something so awesome happens that I want to yell "That is so cool!" The most recent time I can remember doing this was in theatres was during "300: Rise of an Empire." The beginning scene when the Athenians charge against Persian invaders on the shores of Marathon was so epic, I turned to my friend and geeked out about it, jumping with pure delight.

"Mad Max: Fury Road" does not have any moments that were like that for me. It has plenty of cool sequences, but nothing so mind-blowingly awesome that it made me want to disturb other theatre goers. Maybe the fire-blowing guitarist would have done the trick had I not already heard of him. In any case, he is still awesome and the movie is still worth seeing.

Like my page on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/criticalchristopher

Follow me on Twitter: @ChrisCampbell02

*Rotten Tomatoes is a website that takes reviews of all the film critics and determines what percentage of them like the film. This score indicates that 98 percent of critics gave a rating of three out of five stars or higher. The average good movie is about in the high 60s or early 70s.

**I want to emphasize that this is my own opinion. It does not invalidate the views of other critics who enjoyed this movie more than I did. As a film-review blog, I do not think it necessary to say "in my opinion" within the text, but knowing how the Internet works, I do not want to come across as a prideful jerk who thinks only his views are correct.

Netflix Recommendation: "The Babadook" Review and Spoiler Discussion

The Babadook

5 out of 5 Stars

Family Appropriateness rating: 2 out of 5 stars

Not Rated (but it would likely be R if it were)

-Sexual content involving autoerotic stimulation

-Some blood and gore, but it would not be classified as a 

"gore fest"

-Some strong language: about two f-words

-Scary images

"The Babadook" delivers plenty of scares, but there is so much more to it than that.

It tells the story of Amelia (Essie Davis), a struggling single mother of the troubled-child Samuel (Noah Davis). About seven years prior, she underwent a tragedy, and now she has to cope with it while raising her son.

Samuel has been scared of a monster in his room, and Amelia tries to reassure him it is not real. He does not believe her, and he makes it his goal to protect them from it. This causes a lot of stress on Amelia. He does not just act up at home, he causes problems at school and with other relatives.

When she tucks him into bed one night, she finds a book called "The Babadook" and reads it to him. It looks like it was written for children, but it has a frightening message about a monster that will come over and haunt you. Weird things start happening after she reads the book, and she wonders if maybe this "Babadook" is real.

This may sound like I spoiled too much, but trust me, I did not. "The Babadook" has a much deeper meaning to it, and I will not reveal what it is because I would like you to see it for yourself.

The reason I mention this is I saw reviews on YouTube for it, and they spoiled what the movie was trying to do. Coming into the movie, this gave me certain expectations. 

Did this movie meet those expectations? It actually exceeded them. It is both terrifying and deep. Unlike most horror movies these days, it does not rely on jump scares. There is only one part that made me jump, and it is effective. 

Spoilers: What this movie means

As mentioned earlier, Amelia underwent a tragedy seven years ago. On her way to the hospital where she would go into labor, she and her husband were in a car accident. Her husband died, but she still had her son that night. 

Now, whenever she looks at him, he reminds her of the tragedy. Samuel has characteristics that are similar to his father, and this is torture on her. She has not been able to face what happened, and whenever someone mentions her husband, she tenses up. 

Going into this film, the question on my mind was "Is the Babadook real?" The answer is yes: in more ways than you would think.

The Babadook is the tragedy. She fears it, and the movie brilliantly puts you in her situation by comparing it to a horrifying monster. Just because it is in her head, does not make it less real. Everything she has to face is terrifying.

The Babadook does not only haunt her. It first goes after Samuel. For him, it is different. He does not remember the tragedy, but he has to cope with not having a father and living with a woman who seems to blame him for it. 

Not only is the Babadook real in the context of the movie. It is actually real. It can visit anyone. It is the demons we all have to face. For me, it is the fear that people do not like me because I am overweight. This came about when I was in elementary school, and other kids would make fun of me. Even at a point in my life when I was thinner, it still haunted me. Anytime I liked a girl, the Babadook held me back from having the confidence to take my relationship with her any further.

The film ends on an empowering note. Amelia looks at the Babadook and tells it she will not let the monster hurt her or her son any longer. This is her owning up to her fears and not letting them control her. After she does that, she is able to talk about her husband without any problems. The monster is still alive, but now, she can control it. 

"The Avengers: Age of Ultron" Revew

Courtesy: Google

Avengers: Age of Ultron

Recommendation

-Fun and engaging
-Worth seeing in theatres
-Not as good as the first one

Content

-Mild sexual innuendos that will go over kids' heads
-Sci-fi action violence throughout
-Some blood after characters are attacked, but it is not gory







Joss Whedon, the writer/director of both "Avengers" installments, knows the Marvel characters well and keeps the same witty dialogue in "Age of Ultron" that made the first film so enjoyable.

In the film, Tony Stark (Robert Downy Jr.) delves a little too far into the "mad scientist" category. He tries to play God, and it blows up in his face in the form of Ultron (voiced by James Spader), an advanced artificial intelligence with the ability to duplicate itself into robotic bodies. Stark's idea when creating it is protecting the world. The AI takes it to mean protecting the world from humans. To put the story in a nutshell, the Avengers try to stop him.

Like most Marvel films, this one develops the characters further. They are in a different position by the end. Their characterizations are solidified with well-written, often hilarious, dialogue, and some of their motivations are deepened in some brilliant segments that reveal their deepest fears.

One problem with this movie comes from one of these segments, which involves Thor (Chris Hemsworth). It connects to something that happens in the third act of the film, but it is never explained very well.

Another problem comes from the Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) character. Some people have critiqued Whedon's handling of her as anti-feminist. I did not get that from this film. The problem is more about the direction Marvel decides to take her love life. This will be discussed in detail at the end of this review.

There are more action scenes than in "The Avengers." Some are really fun to watch. The filmmakers got creative with the choreography, and even had characters like Thor and Black Widow use Captain America's shield.

BUT...much of this is wasted by bad shooting and editing. There are too many tight shots on the characters' faces so when he/she/it hits an enemy, the audience cannot see what happened. The editing between shots is so quick, my eyes had a hard time seeing the action itself.

I know Whedon can make good action scenes. In the Avengers, he produced this one

Courtesy: imfdb

in which the Hulk jumps on a plane, thrashes at it and throws the ejecting pilot in the opposite direction. This scene is so good because it uses a combination of wide, tight and medium shots. It is not just a few quickly-cut close-ups of the Hulk's face.

I look forward to the next "Avengers" installment, which will be directed by Anthony and Joe Russo, who directed "Captain America: The Winter Soldier." Out of all the Marvel films, that one had the best-shot action sequences.

Spoilers: Black Widow's love life

This film proves the people behind Marvel do not know what they are doing with Natasha Romanov. In "The Avengers," her and Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) deny having an intimate relationship, but the film implies they do. In "Captain America: The Winter Soldier," her and Captain America (Chris Evans) show chemistry, and it looks like something will happen there. In this one, her interest lies in...Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo)?

This leaves the audience thinking "Wait a second, what about Hawkeye? Isn't she supposed to be with him?" The film answers with "Actually, he has had a family the entire time, and Natasha is that friend the kids call 'aunt' even though she's not related," which came out of nowhere and seemed forced.

In a way, Natasha and Bruce is an interesting match-up, given their history, and "Age of Ultron" addresses this. In the first film, Natasha is the one who recruits him even though she is afraid of him. Later on, it is her who is with him when he turns into the Hulk on the helicarrier. This plot point could still be handled better than it is.