Delayed Reaction: The Haunting

The Pitch: It's a movie about a fake haunted house that is actually haunted. Boom. That's the sound of your mind being blown.

What Took Me So Long: I legitimately assumed this was the same thing as House on Haunted Hill.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) The cast is one that I'd expect in a movie I liked. Liam Neeson is fresh off his Jedi days. Owen Wilson is still applying for membership to the Frat Pack. Catherine Zeta-Jones hasn't been ruined by Michael Douglas and cell phone ads. Lili Taylor was still being cast as the lead in a movie. Everything you need for a scary movie is there: darkness, old house, isolation.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: What the fuck was that about? So, like, the house has mystical powers or something? It wants Lili Taylor. How and why did it arrange all the other people coming there? Not a lot of the movie made sense. Nor did it scare me. There you go. Not worth seeing.

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Movie Reaction: Transformers: Age of Extinction

Formula: Transformers ^ 4

Why I Saw It: Dark of the Moon was enough of an improvement to give me hope for this one.

Cast: Has anyone involved in this actually seen one of the movies that user Mark Wahlberg right? He can be tough and he can be funny Bays' own Pain & Gain last year proved that. Here, he's sort of a whiny dad who can turn on Rambo-mode on a dime. He could've been an upgrade over Shia. As he's used here, he wasn't. Nicola Peltz as a stand-in Megan Fox is ok. Her character is an amalgamation of all children from movies with a single parent. Jack Reynor is the most generic "young stud" I've seen in a very long time. Kelsey Grammer chews scenery with the best of them. Stanley Tucci immediately feels comfortable in this world. I think that's a compliment. It's nice to see TJ Miller show up for some comedic relief. There was also more of an attempt than I remember before to make characters out of the Transformers, so there's a fat Transformer (not sure why any Transformer would be fat), a tough guy Transformer, and a Samurai Transformer (I'm not sure why any transformer would have an ethnicity) to go along with Optimus and Bumblebee. I'm convinced by now that in live-action, these movies only work from the human perspective. Giving the Transformers too much personality makes everything much less, well, plausible is the wrong word, but you know what I mean.

Plot: Wahlberg plays a bankrupt engineer who has a workshop akin to a grown up Goonies hang-out. He goes to pick an old movie theater of its valuables and finds a truck. No one seems to think much of why there's a truck in there, but whatever. He brings it back to his workshop and discovers that it's Optimus Prime. Then there's about 3 climactic battles in different places, including Chicago, which is looking pretty good for a city they describe as devastated only five years before by the events in the third movie. I don't know. This plot makes very little sense. This movie goes on forever. It is a hair under 3 hours! The older I get and the more movies I see, I realize that only good movies can fill that much time without it being excruciating. At the 1 hour 40 minute mark I was hoping the big battle happening was the climax. Over an hour later, it finally ends. I have no idea why. The plot makes almost no sense.

Elephant in the Room: Is bigger better? This is the fourth movie in the franchise which began in 2007. I love that first movie. The second movie is a mess and was a cursed production, what with the writer's strike, Shia's injury, and Megan Fox feuding with Michael Bay, so I simply ignore that one. The third movie effectively escalates everything. By now, there's nothing left, so the strategy was to have as much robot battling as possible. That sounds great except that there was so much noise to every fight scene. I often couldn't tell who was fighting or what was going on. There was often fighting going on where I didn't even know the stakes.

To Sum Things Up:
I can forgive a movie for having a ridiculous or impenetrable plot as long as the action is well done. I've defended The Matrix Reloaded for that exact reason. When a movie introduces paper-thin characters, blows things up rather than stage anything, and doesn't even make me laugh, I have nothing to stick to in its defense. I'm not someone looking to dislike Age of Extinction. Even if it was ok I'd call it good. This was terrible. I have no other way to say it. Michael Bay is now sleepwalking through these things. Someone else needs to step in and try something new because we've gone as far as we can with this iteration.

Verdict (?): Strongly Don't Recommend

DVR Purge: 6/18-6/28

I was about to take a few weeks off since the only show I'm following live is Halt and Catch Fire which is not a show I'm digging enough to examine weekly alone. Then, I remembered Girl Meets World was premiering (I know I could watch it online before this week but I'm sticking to TV schedules) and a Purge became imperative.

Past Purges 

Halt and Catch Fire "Close to the Metal"
Someone's going to have to explain to me why anyone puts up with Joe. He's functioning somewhere between mastermind and lucky bastard and I'm not particularly enjoying it. Watching the smartest man in any room is only fun for so long or if the plan is inspiring. That's the difference between Ocean's Eleven and Ocean's Twelve. Eleven had a brilliant plan in which everything was masterfully staged and I love rewatching it again and again. That's how I think the show sees itself. Twelve had a master plan that was haphazard, convoluted, and left to chance too much and I've had to learn to watch the movie for the things it does right while ignoring the sloppiness. That's the show I feel like I'm watching so far. Joe's entire character is dead stares and craftiness. Gordon and Cameron are going through the same self-destructive cycles almost weekly. I'm waiting for something to play out in a way that surprises me more. I'm willing to give it a while to see if that ever happens.

Girl Meets World "Girl Meets Boy"
Talk about a show I can't fairly assess. I'm so far outside the demo that I could have a son or daughter that fits into it. It is a spiritual successor to one of the tentpoles of my childhood that, in all honestly, wasn't that great by its own merits. Because the summer is so dead and it is such a unique perspective for me to watch a show, I'm going to stick with it as long as I can.
If I'm going to pick one thing out of this that bothered me, it's that this didn't feel like a pilot. It felt like episode 10. There's was way too much assumed familiarity with the characters. I assume this is part of the Disney Channel model but it was hard to adapt to. Otherwise, there's a lot of potential to this. The homework strike is directly pulled from an episode of Boy Meets World and that is going to be the show's greatest asset. While it doesn't want to rely on its parent series, I can see mirroring GMW after BMW being very effective. It services the older viewers watching for nostalgia while dipping into a deep roster of proven stories for the primary audience. I'm impressed how much Rowan Blanchard acts like the daughter of Corey and Topanga. Sabrina Carpenter has potential to be a great girl Shawn (btw, that is how I'll be referring to her). Farkle is getting my Disney Channel pass. He's awful but he's not there for me. We'll see how this goes. It's not without precedence for a show like this to work really well. Just look at Degrassi: The Next Generation.

Delayed Reaction: The Talented Mr. Ripley

The Pitch: Matt Damon in Italy, impersonating and killing people.

What Took Me So Long: I always got this and Meet Joe Black confused which made me want to see both less.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) Matt Damon is creepy in this. I never would've considered him as a sly villain type, but it's obvious that I should've. It is nice to see how ridiculously competent a conman he is. I was afraid this would be a story that relied greatly on luck but it was quite the opposite. Basically, he is a Hollywood sociopath done right for a change. Jude Law is smart casting as a rich playboy. Gwenyth Paltrow I liked more that I normally do. I know this is based on a book. Without having read the book, I'm going to go ahead an call this an excellent adaptation because this story is slick as hell.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: This is on the longish side. I'd expect anything in the 2.5 range to have a couple more twists and turns in it, but if that's the cost required to have a story with as few holes and realistic character decisions then I approve.

Verdict (?): Weakly Recommend

Movie Reaction: How to Train Your Dragon 2

Formula: How to Train Your Dragon + 5 years

Why I Saw It: Jersey Boys and Think Like a Man Too weren't getting me into a theater.

[Voice] Cast: This is my favorite voice cast of a Dreamworks movie because it feels the least stunty while still getting good people. It's not in the Dreamworks DNA to pull an Idina Menzel or Jonathan Groff out of their hat (as Disney does), but the likes of Jay Baruchel and America Ferrera certainly fit the characters better that whatever A-lister they could bring in. Baruchel in particular does a great job bringing Hiccup to life. Gerard Butler and Craig Ferguson represent to older generation well and Jonah Hill, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, TJ Miller, and Kristen Wiig keep things fun. Cate Blanchett is a fine addition, as is Dijmon Hounsou to play the villain, Drago.

Plot: As with most animation, it's not a complex story. Berk is now a dragon-friendly place. Everyone has a dragon and they live in harmony. Hiccup discovers a new threat in the form of a man named Drago who is building a dragon army. Dragon fights ensue. There's also some other stuff with Blanchett that moves into spoiler territory that I'll leave alone (but you've probably already figured it out). The trick to anything the animation studios do is telling a story with enough stakes to matter to an older audience without going over kids' heads. That's a challenge that Dreamworks normally isn't up to (hence, Turbo, Madagascar, Shrek). Occasionally though, they find a winning formula. How to Train Your Dragon 2 is their winningest. Thematically, this is a very busy movie without shortchanging any of those themes. I know they were doing things right when at certain moments in the end I was holding back from standing up or leaning forward in my seat. The end is pretty phenomenal, when it wouldn't take much to make it completely cheesy.

Animation: I don't remember being particularly impressed with the look of the first movie (it could be pretty, but I really don't recall). This one is gorgeous though. Anything with Hiccup riding Toothless looks great and all the assorted islands they go to are very detailed and nice to look at.Slightly regret not opting for XD or Imax.

Elephant in the Room: How does it stack up to Pixar? First of all, Pixar hasn't been at the top of its game lately. In fact, Toy Story 3, which went head-to-head with How to Train Your Dragon for the Oscar in 2010, is the last time Pixar did anything at this level. After watching this movie, it's hard to believe how much better it is than anything else Dreamworks has put out and it is every bit an equal with the Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, Up, etc. highs that made Pixar the gold standard in animation for almost two decades.

To Sum Things Up:
This movie is so fucking good! It's funny. It's action-packed. It's sweet. It's perilous. It's everything I could hope it would be and balanced it all so perfectly. I cannot stress enough how surprised I was to be completely overtaken with emotion by the time it reached the climax. Part of my excitement is a result of never understanding what people loved about the first movie and coming into this expecting another The Croods. Here I was looking at The Lego Movie as the animated movie to beat and it has been usurped. 

Verdict (?): Strongly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Inspector Gadget

The Pitch: Hey, we need a live action adaptation of something. What animated series are left?

What Took Me So Long: Occasionally, seeing a cartoon with live actors creates a refreshing new perspective. Other times, it highlights how much we need to not believe this is possible for it to work. Guess which one this is.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) I don't know. It's barely 75 minutes long and I figured it couldn't hurt to watch something that made nearly $100 million at the box office. Matthew Broderick is an actor that I like in general.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: I know he willingly signed up to this but I feel bad for Matthew Broderick as I watched this. Andy Dick was in this too. I should've known better. That is almost always a few strike against a movie. I spent the majority of time trying to figure out how he could have all those gadgets in his body. I couldn't help it. There's no way. And is he really even alive at this point. He's a robot, or rather, a cyborg. Honestly, what bothered me the most was all the winking at the camera. I get it. You know this movie isn't meant to be taken seriously. A couple times is fine but there were constant meta comments about being in a Disney movie, cartoon plausibility, and literally people looking into the camera (I don't recall any actual winks though, so there's that). That kind of breaking of the fourth wall needs to be handled judiciously and that was not the case here.

Verdict (?): Strongly Don't Recommend

DVR Purge: 6/15-6/17

 This might be the last one of these for a while. Louie and Fargo are done and Halt and Catch Fire is not good enough by itself to warrant this. We'll see. I'm working on a few things for July and the Emmy nominations are around the corner. Don't worry. There's always more content.
 

Past Purges 

Halt and Catch Fire "High Plains Hardware"
This is kind of a boring show. I'm not all that invested in the stakes at this point, partly because I don't understand how this is going to avoid completely rewriting modern history. So far, Joe, Gordon, and Cameron are all hot messes as people in their own way (hiding from a past, trying to escape disappointment, trying to be a rebel despite a desire to succeed). I have the free time to see how this plays out still, but something needs to happen soon.

Louie "Pamela Part 2 & 3"
So ends a very different season of Louie in almost every way. I'll get to my thoughts of the season at another time. I want to focus on the end (or beginning) of this Pamela saga. Of any of the women that Louie has dated in the show, she is somehow the most toxic and most appealing for him. She's outright mean to him, but I'm pretty sure that's a lot of what attracted him to her in the first place. You could argue that everything he's gone through since she left, and especially everything from this season, he should've moved beyond wanting to be with her. I do wonder how much of this is a slide back after Amia and a fix for his loneliness and how much is him sincerely wanting to be with her. Still, Pam Adlon and Louis C.K. have fantastic chemistry together. I'm never angry that she's going to be in an episode and the fact that Pamela may not be the best person for Louie very well could be the point. It gave the season and solid end point if not the most satisfying one.

Fargo "Morton's Fork"
How'd they do that? No, really. How did they take an incredibly praised movie with such a distinct tone and rhythm, make a TV show about it, without using any of the same characters or copying the story, and produce a show this good? It defies all expectations. In terms of finales, this was designed to hit you as a little overwhelming at first. There was no shootout with Malvo. Lester didn't get caught and sent to jail for his actions (His poor brother, still in jail). Molly, didn't do much at all. If you'd've asked me what I wanted from the finale, those are all things I'd've been looking forward to seeing. I'm glad I didn't get any of that. Nearly all of that was the right move. Molly has done her work. There's no need to put her in harm's way. If you can't be satisfied by her becoming chief and finding out she was right about everything, then I don't know what show you've been watching the past 10 weeks. Gus getting to be the one to stop Malvo for good, considering that, within the scope of the show, him letting Malvo go at the traffic stop set so much of what followed into motion. Then there's Lester, the monster he is, who I still felt a moment of pride for when he tricked Malvo into stepping on the bear trap. Don't get me wrong, Lester absolutely got the end he deserved. Remembering the pathetic mess he was in the first episode, there was a small victory in how cunning he's become. Mostly though, he sucks. The episode is filled with small moments of closure too, like Bill speech to Molly about why he doesn't want to be the chief anymore, that deliriously charming scene between Lou and Greta on the porch, and getting the answer to Agent Pepper's riddle. I hope this Limited Series gets all the Emmys. It deserves them.

Movie Reaction: 22 Jump Street

Formula: (21 Jump Street ^2) / sequel

Why I Saw It: 21 Jump Street was one of the most pleasant surprises of the 2012 box office.

Cast: Jonah Hill's been in my near untouchable category since 2006 or 7 so it should go without saying that I like what he's doing here. It helps that I already like Schmidt from the first movie and he's just as funny this time. Channing Tatum keeps getting better. I'm not sure what his last misfire even was (The Eagle? Maybe White House Down?). Here, he brings back everything that is fun about Jenko and arguably improves upon him. Ice Cube gets an increased role in and it is the smartest decision they could've made as his anger blends perfectly with Schmidt and Jenko's ying and yang situation. Amber Stevens (yes, Ashleigh from Greek) gets a prominent part in this even though she is more of a sounding board for other people to be funny around instead of getting jokes herself (which is a shame). The cast is rounded out with scene-stealers I'd never seen before like The Lucas Borthers, Jillian Bell, and Wtatt Russell. All of them get some great moments. Oh, and there's Nick Offerman saying nothing but meta-commentary. How can you hate that?

Plot: What's the best way to say it's extremely similar to the first movie? Because that's what it is: the same in all the best ways. Switch out High School for college and recast the nerds with a football played and Brie Olsen with Amber Stevens and it's the same. Schmidt finds love. Jenko finds friends. Their friendship is tested. There's a couple shootouts and things explode that have no business exploding. The only thing that me discussing the plot anymore will do is ruin some jokes, so suffice it to say that if you liked the first, you almost have to like the second.

Elephant in the Room: Any sequelitis? The movie is acutely aware of being a sequelitus and uses it as a chance to attack everything that is wrong with sequels (bigger budget with fewer results, relying too much on what worked originally, etc.). In a way, what the original Scream is to scary movies, 22 Jump Street is to sequels. It manages to be the thing (an action comedy) while also commenting directly on the thing. It's quite clever and dense as hell with jokes about sequels as well as complete non sequiturs (there's a great Benny Hill joke in there that especially tickled me).

To Sum Things Up:
This is the most unlikely of franchise revivals and it goes to show that Hollywood's endless rebooting is not bad in and of itself. The writers/directors/producers have to have an idea of something different to do with the idea. 22 Jump Street reminds me a lot of Gremlins 2 in that it is a sequel with an agenda and that agenda is deconstruction. For those of you less concerned with what the movie is doing, let me assure you, this is an extremely enjoyable 2 hours. I'll have no issue with this being the biggest comedy of the summer because, well, what's working against it: two pedigreed leads, strong supporting cast, clever script, red-hot directing duo (fresh of The Lego Movie). I can't find any place for ill-will here.

Verdict (?): Strongly Recommend

DVR Purge: 6/8-6/14

Three shows hardly looks like a busy week, but it doesn't account for the season of Orange is the New Black I watched and catching up on Game of Thrones.

Past Purges 

Halt and Catch Fire "FUD"
Ooo, this is not looking like a show I care to watch based on the second episode. The episode is shot to look cool. Not pretty. Not interesting. Cool. Lee Pace as Joe MacMillan is intense and the intensity is trying too hard to drive his interest. I'm not all that interested in his backstory yet because I don't know what he's bringing to the table in the present other than chaos. I audibly ground when Gordon initially hid that Cameron was a girl. While I still think it opens up a lot of plot directions I have no desire to see, they did make up for it by having him fess up to Donna later on. Cameron is still 1983 Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. I'm waiting for a shade of her that hasn't been done before. I did like when she went clothes shopping and tried out some "proper" work attire. She's not all rebel in there. The summer is light enough that I'm in no hurry to drop it. I am hoping that future episodes step things up a bit.

Louie "In the Woods"
That was a hell of a thing. FX has really given C.K. the freedom to do anything, including a mini-movie about young Louie's experience with pot. It's a rather immersing episode and is a great reminder of how much of Louie's work on the show is beyond the performance, because the show still feels exactly like Louie even though C.K. is mostly not in it. On that note, I have to say that was good casting with the kid playing young Louie. I completely bought that performance. Great casting all over, really. Apparently Phillip Seymour Hoffman was originally cast in the episode, so the dedication was another sad reminder that he's not around. Jeremy Renner plays the weird, menacing kind of character I prefer for him. F. Murray Abraham gets some recasting as Louie's dad, not his uncle. That's one of those things with Louie that you simply have to get used to. Amy Landecker gets a return stint as his mother and did a fine job with it. The thing I enjoy about the episode is how small and real it felt. Even if the story wasn't autobiographical, I'm certain that's exactly how his middle school felt. It was a very personal episode, if not a funny one. What sold it for me was when we finally get his response to Lilly about it all ("I love you and I'm here.") because it basically means, he doesn't know what to do, but he knows that fighting it all can only make it worse.

Fargo "A Fox, A Rabbit, and A Cabbage"
Lester is the worst. Until as recently as last week, I found myself rooting for Lester, not necessarily to get away with things, but to get some small victories. As it turns out, he's the "little guy" that gives "little guys" a bad name. He has completely reshaped his entire life in the past year to be the life he's always wanted. He is successful, with a beautiful and adoring wife, but he can't help himself. First, he picks an answer finally to Malvo's question and it ends with three innocent people dead. Then, after she's been willing to lie to Molly for him, and after a heartbreaking speech about how she always liked Lester and she'd been waiting for a man like him her entire life, Lester sacrifices his wife to be killed by Malvo. He's a complete dick. At least Malvo knows what he is doing. This episode is certainly the one that I noticed the directing the most. Something like the scene at the diner was so good and so tense, that I didn't really even care that it used the perfect timing coincidence to avoid a blood-bath (normally something I can't stand). Heading into the finale, it's clear that we have a The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly situation with Molly, Malvo, and Lester playing the parts respectively and I couldn't be more excited about it. I have one rule for the finale: Gus and Molly need to live. That's not too much to ask for, right?

Delayed Reaction: Michael

The Pitch: What if angels aren't so clean?

What Took Me So Long: I think I've been holding out for catching it on TBS' Dinner and a Movie a decade since being removed from the rotation and numerous years since it went off the air. But, seriously, they showed that movie and the "I'm not that kind of angel" clip almost weekly for the late 90s.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) It's a funny idea. Norah Efron makes just about anything work under the Romantic Comedy umbrella. Travolta has a great sincere, asshole, doesn't give a damn charm

Why I Wish I Hadn't: This really only works are far as the pitch. Once I got my laughs from the angel not acting like angels should, all that was left was a bunch of nonsense about heaven and religion that tried to be generic enough to not insult any religions. It kind of lost me when it started jumping through those hoops.

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: White Fang

The Pitch: A story of a young man and his wolf, except they aren't really together much at all in the movie.

What Took Me So Long: I guess Jack London has never been a draw for me the way I'm told by society he should be.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) Honestly, I'll watch any movie with a dog/wolf running around, doing stuff (preferably not talking. I'm looking at you Snow Buddies!), so this was in my wheelhouse. I'm going to have to give props to the shooting of the animal fights too. Until I saw the Humane Society stamp of approval at the end, I really thought they were getting away with some animal violence, especially in the dogfight scenes. I don't approve of the violence, but I can appreciate when it is well shot.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: This is billed as a story about a young man and his wolf buddy yet an awful lot of the movie is them apart. I won't pretend that I was invested deeply in the movie but I feel like I blinked and then the bonding time for Ethan Hawke's character and White Fang was over.

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: The Bridges of Madison County

The Pitch: Let's make the dullest movie of all time.

What Took Me So Long: Have I not mentioned that Clint Eastwood not in a Western is not something I'll go out of my way to see.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) I won't pretend that I expected this to be a movie I'd love, but I have a good track record of coming out of romantic movies not hating them. I wanted to appreciate the work that Clint Eastwood and Meryl Streep do, but I couldn't get past how completely bored I was by the whole thing.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: I found this about as exciting as watching paint dry. I'm sure that's an exaggeration. I'm not sure it's by all that much though. You may notice that I've avoided any specifics about that plot. I got about as far as Streep is a housewife. It's the 60s. Eastwood is not her husband. After that, my mind kept drifting. I considered rewinding to catch anything I missed but that would mean having to rewatch part of it and make the interminable experience go on that much longer. Perhaps I will give this another chance someday. I'm in no hurry though. Did I mention that this was dull?

Verdict (?): Strongly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Footloose

The Pitch: Kevin Bacon wants to dance. He's in a town where that is somehow illegal. Drama!

What Took Me So Long: Dance movies aren't typically my thing.

Why I Saw It: Somehow, in my mind, it reached seeing the original or the new one which ended up being no contest. This movie is such an 80s movie. The soundtrack is undeniably perfect for the movie. The dancing is impressive. I've never thought of Bacon as a dancer but he and his body double have some good moves. It's a fun movie.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: It drags at the end a lot. The first hour is so brisk, then it screeches to a halt until the closing dance scene finally happens. Oh, and when Woody kicks the shit out of Lori Singer, how the hell does that not end with him in cuffs. That was so violent. I was completely taken aback by that.

Verdict (?): Weakly Recommend

Movie Reaction: The Fault in Our Stars

Formula: A Walk To Remember * The Spectacular Now

Why I Saw It: Occasionally, It's fun to be the complete demographic minority seeing a movie (82% female, 79% under 25).

Cast: This movie doesn't work without Shailene Woodley. That is worth repeating. The movie would not work if it didn't have Shailene Woodley. She can sell every single line and moment she's asked to. That is key. She's still trying to get out of the "poor man's Jennifer Lawrence" business and she's taking an interesting path to do it, although she still has some work to do. Ansel Elgort does an impressive job playing cocky, but not unlikeable, which is much harder than it looks. Laura Dern and Sam Trammell play the concerned parents well, Dern in particular. Nat Wolff is the standard comedic-relief best friend and I spent most of the time reminding myself that he wasn't Christopher Mintz-Plasse. That isn't a knock. They have a similar energy is all.

Plot: The shortest description I can give is "cancer kids fall in love". That alone tells you  or implies the beats of the movie, especially when you throw in the description "tear-jerker". I saw the movie opening night and it looks like the fangirls came out in full force that night. This likely changed my perspective of the movie because there was normally and "aww" or "here it comes" before any scene of note could take me by surprise. I couldn't be too mad though because the best thing I can say about the movie is that it's complete fan service. Granted, I haven't read the book, so I may be a little off, but the driving force for everything had the feel of "how can we make this moment from the book work best in a movie" rather than "how can we make the best movie?". I'd be shocked if any fans were disappointed by this. You may have noticed I've given almost no specifics about the plot and there's a reason for that. Either 1) you've already read the book, making a description pointless or 2) you've haven't read it, in which case you really only need to basics to know if it is worth your time.

Elephant in the Room: I hear the movie made some people cry. Yeah. It's one of those, but dialed up to 11. Toward the end, nearly every other scene is designed to make you cry. I probably would've broke down too, but so many of the people around me who obviously read the book kept alerting me of when a gut punch was coming with their own pre-winces. Thing thing is, almost all of the scenes are earned. They are the result of developing the characters and serve the greater story rather than being moments inserted to evoke a reaction. Still, bring some tissues as a precaution.

To Sum Things Up:
This is an ok movie with some great performances (or at least some good and one great performance). It's the kind that sets its own goals for what it needs to do to be considered effective and accomplishes all of them. It has a rather specific audience in mind, so if romances or tear-jerkers aren't your thing, there's nothing for you. This was a good little detour from the action movies and comedies of summer.

Verdict (?): Weakly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home

The Pitch: People want another Star Trek movie, but we don't have the money for as bunch of new sets.

What Took Me So Long: Like most of the Star Trek movies, I've technically seen this before but I was so young, it shouldn't count.

Why I Saw It: This is easily the most comedic of the Star Trek movies. At times, it veers directly into self-parody. Still, it does it while staying true to all the characters and including genuine stakes. Mostly though, it's just very funny.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: Whales. What was up with that? Did they have some sort of an agreement with San Francisco that they could filmed there as long as they included a message about saving the whales? It's a weird choice.

Verdict (?): Weakly Recommend

DVR Purge: 5/28-6/7

This week, one Louie saga ends for another to begin, Fargo makes a big jump, and AMC introduces a new series that could be pretty good.

Past Purges 

Halt and Catch Fire "I/O"
I have no idea what this series is. Lee Pace as Joe MacMillan has an asshole Don Draper quality too him that I don't find that interesting yet. I could in time. For now, it's nothing more than Frank Underwood picking on people he's smarter than. I think Scoot McNairy's Gordon is supposed to be out eyes into this world and I need a little more back story for him to determine if I like that. Mackenzie Davis could either be very interesting or a lazy Girl With the Dragon Tattoo type. Kerry Bishe is looking like a wet blanket and not much else. This is likely to change because all I know is the pilot. It looks like every bit of advertising was about the pilot and I'm not sure where it goes from here. It all looks very litigious and technical. The episode by itself tells an intriguing enough story and asks a lot of questions that I'm curious to get the answers to like what Joe has been up to the last year or what exactly happened with Gordon's first attempt at a computer. Enough to keep me watching, at least.

Louie "Elevator Part 6"
It's Louie, so of course the ending of this story would make perfect sense and also be unexpected. It was all but guaranteed that the Amia thing would end with someone translating something. I assumed it would be her aunt, but a waiter works too. The part I didn't see coming was how harrowing the Hurricane Jasmine Forscythe part would be. I love that Hertz was still open. It's one of those rare cases where the product plug can be funny and the company on-board (because, let's face it. That's great service). It was nearly jarring how that was bookended by the Amia stuff. So far, I'm enjoying Louie's serialized work this season although I am starting to miss some of the stand-alone stuff.

Louie "Pamela Part 1"
I simply can't decide whether I like Pamela or not. There's a great uncomfortable chemistry between them and I like Pamela Adlon in general but he's such a putz and she'd mean. Also, I don't want to harp on this because I did think it was a funny enough scene but it's a little unfortunate ending last week with Louie not taking no with Amia last week, then again with Pamela (not to mention "Model"). I get that this is constantly a heightened reality and this could all be less accurate than it is, how difficult it feels for him and he's not a dense writer/director, but it sure leaves some room for the audience to be uncomfortable.

Fargo "The Heap"
I certainly didn't expect the time jump. Part wants to feel cheated because everything was escalating at such a brisk pace, but I've already come around to the benefits of it. Malvo took care of the entire Fargo operation so no need to be on the run due to that. The case against Lester and Malvo has been closed and Molly can't sustain being as insubordinate as she is in that short of a time. Without the active ongoing investigation, Lester doesn't have much to do. So, yeah, I'm ok with the jump. Lester is doing better than ever now. If it didn't happen because he killed his wife, I'd be pretty happy to see him get a backbone. Molly and Gus are together (and he's a mail main!) which pleases me. Key and Peele's FBI agents are stuck in the file room and waxing philosophic about what IS a file room. I'm not sure what Malvo is up to, but really, is anyone ever sure about that? I'm certain it's nothing good. The time jump is forcing me to invite the True Detective comparison and I can only hope Fargo ends a bit stronger than that.

Delayed Reaction: The One

The Pitch: Jet Li fights everyone, including himself.

What Took Me So Long: I wasn't a fan of this type of movie in 1985 or in 1994. So, it wasn't going to be different in 2001.

Why I Saw It: Jet Li is impressive at what he does. This isn't a very long movie and after a brief period of setup, the fights scenes are plenty.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: So, was the thinking that they would never find someone to match Jet Li fighting so they should have him fight himself? The biggest problem with the final fight between the two Jet Lis was that I spent the whole time focusing on how they were editing around it and couldn't appreciate the actual fight. That and all the gravity-defying moves called attention to the effects and muted how impressed I was by Li's actual skills. Romeo Must Die was a much better showcase. Lastly, I appreciate the attempt at a science fiction story and I imagine the words "Total Recall" were mentioned more than a few times during production, but it didn't engage me in the slightest way for this movie. Did they think this was the Highlander?

Verdict (?): Strongly Don't Recommend

June Movie Preview

It's looking like an uncharacteristically lean June this year. Last year was bustling with new releases to the point that I had a three movie weekend just to fit it all. By comparison, there's a couple easy picks and one legitimately busy weekend. Only one movie is one that I've been anxiously awaiting. There's potential for a couple movies to surprise me. Mostly though, I'm looking to July which should be a bit stronger.

January | February | March | April | May  

2013

March |  April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December

6/6

The Lock: Too much of a toss up to say.

Other Options

Edge of Tomorrow
Working For It: Tom Cruise is one of the last real movie stars and he's refusing to age gracefully. I kind of dig that. Between Oblivion last year and Edge of Tomorrow, it looks like he is determined to earn one more blockbuster outside of the franchise game before he quiets down. I also strongly approve of Emily Blunt being a badass.
Working Against It: Like Oblivion, this looks more like a collection of ideas from other Sci-Fi movies rolled into one and I have a hard time believing the orginal script called for the soldier to be in his 50s. Until Cruise starts taking note of what Liam Nesson has been doing for the past few years to plausibly stay an action lead*.
Odds I'll See It: 50%

*Jack Reacher was a good first step.

The Fault in Our Stars
Working For It: Shailene Woodly is quickly becoming the new It-Girl and for good reason. After her work in The Spectacular Now last year, I have no doubt she will be great in this role. More importantly though, I find myself surrounded by a rabid fanbase for this book and seem likely to be pulled into it. I'd probably hold off on this if not for the likelihood I'll accept an invite to see it with a friend.
Working Against It: In general, this is not my kind of movie. As opposed to The Spectacular Now, which had critical buzz for months leading up to its release, The Fault in Ours Stars has been pretty quiet. I don't think it went through the festival circuit the way Now did, but I don't like to trust a movie like this sight-unseen. That's how you get Charlie St. Cloud.
Odds I'll See It: 50%

Obvious Child [Limited]
Working For It: Speaking of critical buzz, I've heard a lot about Jenny Slate's Obvious Child since it first popped up in Sundance. Slate in particular has benefitted from this buzz and I'm curious to see Mona-Lisa Saperstein from Parks & Rec. front and center.
Working Against It: Everything I've heard about this movie gives me the impression that it is more of a vehicle to showcase Slate than a good movie, and I'm ok holding off on seeing a dramedy about a woman in a state of arrested developement until it makes the Netflix rounds. Besides, I doubt it'll expand to my area anyway.
Odds I'll See It:

6/13

The Lock: 22 Jump Street
Working For It: 21 Jump Street was one of the biggest surprises of 2012. It had no business being as good as it was, no less from the same people who wrote Project X (one of my least favorite movies that same year). Two years later, Channing Tatum has become a force to be recommend with, Jonah Hill is a critical darling, and the directors are coming off The Lego Movie's super success. The trailer looks hilarious and the meta-humor looks like it will stay a step ahead of getting stale.
Working Against It: Beyond sequelitis where no one tries as hard the next time around, I can't think of what would stand in its way.
Odds I'll See It: 95%

Other Options

How to Train Your Dragon 2
Working For It: The first movie is beloved to the point where some people contest it was better than Toy Story 3 that year*. It is the rare Dreamworks Animated feature that appears to be more concerned with story than the number of easy jokes and A-list talent do the voices they can fit in. The second movie, from what I hear does everything right that the first movie did and doesn't give into any of Dreamworks' worse habits.
Working Against It: While I liked the first movie, it didn't fill me with awe the way it did others that I know. More importantly, I'm talking about what I see in theaters. I do matinees. Matinees for this means children. I need to be in the right mood for a theater full of children and parents too exhausted to keep them from being annoying. Along with the direct competition from Jump Street, if I'm seeing this, it won't be opening weekend.
Odds I'll See It: 60%
*Which I consider a step too bold.

6/20

The Lock: There's too strong a chance that this will go to How to Train Your Dragon 2 for me to dare call anything this weekend a lock.

Other Options

Jersey Boys
Working For It: Clint Eastwood is a multi-Oscar winning director taking on a Grammy Award winning Musical with a cast including Oscar Winner Christopher Walken.
Working Against It: Name a Clint Eastwood musical...Exactly. There's reason to have pause.
Odds I'll See It: 20%

Think Like a Man Too
Working For It: Kevin Hart is becoming a comedy superstar. Add in people like Micheal Ealy (played straight-man to Hart admirably in About Last Night), Regina Hall (matched him excellently in About Last Night), Meagan Good (always glad to see her), Gabrielle Union (who doesn't age...ever), Taraji P. Henson (Oscar nominee, mind you), Romany Malco (does anyone know why he's not in more comedies?), and others and you have a potentially lethal ensemble, especially considering Tyler Perry's name is nowhere to be found.
Working Against It: I never saw the first, so I can't speak to its quality. It's based on a Steve Harvey book that I haven't read, so I can't speak to its quality. Mostly though, it's playing the homonym game with the word "too" and that bothers me and may be too damning to overcome.
Odds I'll See It: 8%

6/27

The Lock: Transformers: Age of Extinction
Working For It: Transformers: Dark of the Moon was a fine return to form if not quality after the cinematic atrocity that was Revenge of the Fallen. They've removed Shia Labeouef who was more of a detraction by the third and replaced him with Mark Wahlberg who, quite frankly, fits this kind of movie well. By now, we know exactly what to expect from the series and I like giant robots and explosions on a big screen. I don't need to know any more plot than that going in.
Working Against It: It's the only major release this weekend which is slid it into being a lock. I'm not crazy about action movies that are being increasingly made for foreign markets. Not to insult world-cinema, but if you thought trying to please everyone in America was dangerous, remember that Battleship was made trying to please a global audience. You've been warned.
Odds I'll See It: 53%

Movie Reaction: Maleficent

Formula: (Oz The Great and Powerful * Sleeping Beauty) / The Wizard of Oz

Why I Saw It: It's been a while since I've seen Angelina on screen and I'm curious to track Elle Fanning's career trajectory*.

*That girl already has 40 credits to her name. That's absurd!

Cast: Do you like Angelina Jolie? If so, here you go. She returns to the screen after a few years in a big way. She is, expectedly, all over this thing. Sure. There's some other characters. Elle Fanning is a completely bland (not her fault) Aurora. Sharlto Copley is a comically badly developed antagonist. Lesley Manville, Imelda Staunton, and Juno Temple are some annoying fairies. Even Brenton Thwaites is kind enough to show up and be ignored to make a thematic point. None of them matter because they aren't Angelina Jolie. Jolie is...not bad. Let's put it this way. She is the only actress I can imagine playing this role well, so in that respect, she matched my expectations.

Plot: You're familiar with Sleeping Beauty, right? Ok. Gut that like a fish so that all you have is the spine. Now, use that fish spine to try and rebuild it as a cat. Uncomfortable, right? That's this movie in a nutshell. I get the sense that someone had an agenda and a vague story, then someone else said "Hey, can you fit that around the Sleeping Beauty story?". To which, the response was an enthusiastic "Not comfortably". The movie really wants to tell the story from Maleficent's perspective, but as a protagonist. I think the goal was to make her 50/50 good/evil, but it's more of a 90/10 split. I mean, she curses Aurora to get back at the king (why she didn't curse the king instead of the daughter he has no interest in, I'll never know) and then proceeds to do nothing but watch over her for the next 16 years. Oh, and this movie's Aurora is more like "Napping Beauty". She's out for about a day. If you are going to do a reimagining from a new perspective, it should feel like that: a perspective. This is a complete edit of the story that only keeps enough points (like the pricking of the finger, which couldn't've felt more out of place) to make it recognizable without putting in the effort to make it clever.

Elephant in the Room: Disney is trying to distance itself from the Disney Princess, huh? This is a good thing. For years, Disney's bread and butter was tales of the princess who gets saved by the prince. That's antiquated a shit and they've been taking a PR beating over it for years. So, they gave us Brave. Then, we get Frozen. Now, they are doing a post-facto edit of one of the classics. I'm starting to wonder if they are being a little too obvious about it, but I'd rather have obvious than ignoring it.

To Sum Things Up:
I was not impressed. Angelina Jolie is a great choice for the role, but it's like all the effort went into the casting and none to the script. There's a number of "wouldn't this look cool" moments and a couple tweaks of classic tropes but nothing all that interesting about it. The movie reminded me a lot of the Beowolf movie that Jolie was in, in which so many of the beats of the story were changed that it was nearly unrecognizable from the source material (Referring to the movie, not the grimm fairy tale, in the case of Sleeping Beauty). The more time I have to think about the movie, the less impressed I am of it. 

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: The Conversation

The Pitch: A surveillance expert becomes suspicious. I believe that is called "vocational irony".

What Took Me So Long: The title scared me. It reminded me too much of My Dinner with Andre.

Why I Saw It: for years, this was that other movie that Francis Ford Coppala was nominated for in 1974. I honestly had no idea what this would be. It's really interesting to watch this with a modern perspective because all the surveillance technology is so...analog. The twist at the end is pretty great. I'm a sucker for a scene that can be changed dramatically from a different perspective. This is probably my second favorite thing I've seen Gene Hackman in too (Hint: My favorite is either Hoosiers or Heartbreakers. Guess which).

Why I Wish I Hadn't: It is a little slow, I guess. Not enough to complain about. It's impossible for me to not think about it with The Godfather Part II, which is a tough comparison, so that hurts my opinion of it.

Verdict (?): Strongly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: The American

The Pitch: George Clooney...oh, you need more? He's a spy, I guess. Or a hit man. Does it really matter?

What Took Me So Long: I've never had any idea what this movie was about. Nothing I ever saw about it ever told me a damn thing other than "it has George Clooney in it".

Why I Saw It: I don't know. I kind of picked this randomly from my Netflix queue. What it was doing in my queue to begin with, I don't remember. I suppose Clooney is good in this. It's such a quiet movie, I lost track of it often. The tone is consistent and that's a good thing.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: Did I mention it was quiet? It was so quiet. There wasn't enough else there to justify how subtle absolutely everything was. Yeah, this was one of those "I watched it. Check it off the list" shows.It reminded me of Traitor, but somehow slower.

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Top Gun

The Pitch: I want to film planes moving really fast. Write some sort of movie to allow a lot of that.

What Took Me So Long: I know the whole plot. At different points, I've probably seen every scene before, only disjointed. So, I considered this one that I'd seen before but finally, I reconsidered.

Why I Saw It: It's one of the biggest movies of the 80s and certainly one that holds up better than it should. Tom Cruise was a "movie star" before this, right? Well, he definitely is in this one. I could see every beat of this hero's journey story coming and it didn't matter because the cast is cool (for their time), the planes are fast, and the action is loud. I'm pretty sure this would still hold up as an IMAX experience. Now I'm thinking about "Danger Zone" in Dolby surround sound.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: Ok, it's a little dated from the style to the soundtrack. That's supposed to happen though. It's probably the best distillation of 1986 into a movie (I assume, because I wasn't alive then. I'm alright pretending that I know firsthand if you are).

Verdict (?): Weakly Recommend