Super 8!

Super 8 -- 4.5/5

** Just to warn everyone, I will have some majors spoilers in this post, so my recommendation would be just to go see the movie before you read this :D**

There are hundreds of great and fabulous reviews of Super 8 as of now, so why should I just repeat what everyone's saying? Either way, here's a recap: Super 8 is totally a love letter from JJ to Spielberg that is a mesh of ET, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Cloverfield, The Goonies...I can go on and on. However, aside from the super long list of similar films, this movie is probably one of the only original (not sequel, not comic book, not famous and fabulous book series) movies of this summer. That being said, I strongly feel like the two movies that most closely parallel ET direction and plot-wise, while having a similar monster design as Clover-

field.

The paralleling of ET is probably the reason why I totally love this movie. From the amount of times I've seen ET, I know the movie back and forth and I can quote the whole movie probably on request. I'm sure this also applies to Mr. JJ Abrams, because there are a few shots in Super 8

that are pretty much exactly like ET. Remember the scene where our faithful alien E.T. escapes the evil bad-guys with their flashlights (which the bad guys in Super 8 have some flashy flashlights as well!)? Well, there's a shot of the town in Super 8 that was almost a carbon-copy of the shot. The endings are also similar in that the kids and parents watch the

space ship go away into oblivion. Fabulous.

There are also countless plot points that are super similar. There is a missing parent, the leading young male has a crush on the super tall blonde chick (small, but could be a parallel :D), the gang of kids who work together against the bad guys in the end, the alien in Super 8 builds something out of junk so he can get home...ahahaha that one made me laugh the most I think.

Michael Giacchino's score for Super 8 also sounds extremely similar to John William's for ET. I wish I had a great example on me, but there's one little theme the begins with the same chord progression as one in ET. I have an exert of the Super 8 score (something that was hard to find), but I also have the exact example from the ET score that I spoke about previously (it's at about the minute mark, I wish I had an example of the Super 8 one I was talking about, and I hope this is the right theme I was thinking of...).

Well, aside from all those ET parallels, the alien looks a little too much like the one from Cloverfield. I even have an example picture!

And that about sums it up! If you read this without seeing it, just go see it. It's just...the best summer movie thus far, barely better than X-Men.

X-Men: First Class

X-Men: First Class -- 4/5

I feel like I'm not one to really judge on how well-adapted a comic book movie is, seeing as I've never read a single one in my life, or watched a cartoon. Those never really interested me. However, when you mention a super hero movie, I'm usually all over it. This is because I find super hero movies to have evolved really nicely over the years, forming a more darker film than most of the predecessors. Chew me out if I'm wrong, I don't care. I also find super hero movies easily more action packed than any other summer blockbuster (well, maybe not counting Transformers).

All-in-all, I enjoy seeing a really well put together super hero movie, and this is exactly what X-men: First Class is. Though the beginning is a tad rushed, the rest of the movie flows really nicely. I got a feel for all the characters, and I liked most of them. That being said, because it's the first film in this reboot trilogy it does introduce a lot of characters. However, I never really felt like any of the more pushed aside characters were that dear to my heart that I wish they had a bigger role. The film essentially focuses on Charles and Erik's relationship, which is does quite well. Other mentionable things about this movie that were great was the creative use of montage (while recruiting and training), the fight scenes (at where the mutant teens were locked up and the final battle), and the blur between who was right and who was wrong. The really interesting thing about this film is that Erik agrees with his enemy (name) on how they view the human population. It's fascinating that the film itself was more of a revenge story rather than "let's fight for good, and conquer evil." Though I am a huge fan of that type of story (uhm, Harry Potter), seeing something different is always a refreshing thing, and since super hero films usually have this theme, it's quite astounding that this one did not.

Aside form story, I really did think it was amazing how they pretty much made every mutant look pretty glamorous and handsome to look at, minus probably Banshee (played by Caleb Landry Jones). Poor guy, but it's just that red hair, not everyone can be Rupert Grint. Either way, I fell in love with Nicholas Hoult (Beast) via Skins a few month back, James McAvoy (Xavier) is simply irresistible, and Rose Byrne (Moira MacTaggert, she was not a mutant actually) and Jennifer Lawrence (Mystique) are two very gorgeous women whom I really like seeing in films :). I found it pretty amusing that the people who were human in this film were a little old and ugly, but then again that could be because they were all either government or army men.

This X-Men film was really something special. It played so well as a summer movie and I know I want to see this one again.

3 Top 10 Summer Movies down, 7 to go! And Super 8 in 2 days EXCITED :D!

Battle Memorial Day Sequel Weekend: Kung Fu Panda 2 vs. The Hangover Part II

VS

In this review I'm going to do things a little differently. Instead of doing 2 separate reviews for the 2 sequels, I'm going to compare and contrast them, saying what film did the sequel-thing right and which one did it horribly wrong.

Three summers ago I was going into college. I had this fantastic new job at the Hill Country Galleria Cinemark and I loved everyone I was working with. And Kung Fu Panda had come out. Now up against the year's best animated picture (Wall-e), Kung Fu Panda was just not as fantastical. However, after rewatching it again (on bluray of course) I realized that the movie actualy was pretty fantastic in its own way. The movie is gorgeously animated and all the jokes are super clever. It's funny, it's beautiful, and the story pans out marvelously. I laughed throughout the film again. It was hilarious.
Now, two summers ago one of my favorite recent comedies came out in theaters. I went to see The Hangover twice, which is something I rarely ever do for a comedy (I'm more of a repeat action-blockbuster kind of girl). It was unexpected, unpredictable, and totally hilarious. The Hangover is simply a fantastic raunchy comedy that I love. Like Kung Fu Panda, it too was hilarious.

This past holiday weekend both these films sequels hit theaters. The Hangover Part II swooped in and almost doubled the original's weekend gross with $86.5 million. That's a whole lot of people who decided to go out and see said raunchy R-rated comedy sequel. On my last day at the theater, all of our showings for The Hangover Part II sold out completely after 6pm. It's safe to say it did really really well. Kung Fu Panda 2, however, did not do so well. Coming in with a total of $48 million, the film's predecessor pulled in $60 million on a non-holiday weekend 3 years ago. I guess this wasn't the weekend for a children's movie after all (probably because all the parents were out seeing the R-rated movie).

It's obvious what film did much better money-wise this weekend, but which one was better overall? I of course saw them both, being I was very excited for the 2 films this summer. I must say, as much as I understand the box office results, I do not agree with them.

The Hangover Part II was a horrible film. Not only did it pretty much just cut-and-paste the first film's formula, making it completely predictable (something that the first film was so good at evading), but the jokes just weren't funny. Director Todd Phillips must just be laughing behind his desk in Hollywood right now, pointing his giant finger at us all for paying for this movie. I felt like the movie also didn't take advantage of all the funny jokes it could have. Being a fish out of water in any country is always a funny scenario, but this film took that and stomped on it. The movie had this super serious tone to all its humor and it felt to me that there's something about Thailand that maybe Mr. Phillips doesn't like. Every time a person near me would laugh, I would look over at them and think "How is someone getting shot funny? That's not funny, this is serious." The film got people to laugh at parts that, if they were in another film, people would not be laughing at ever. Also the total lax attitude about the [spoiler alert] chopped off finger was ridiculous. I would never be so nonchalant about my finger getting chopped off if I wanted to be a surgeon. Say goodbye to your future. [/spoiler]. I usually don't get the feeling to walk out of a film, but with this movie I almost did. The only reason I didn't was because my boyfriend had gone with me and I didn't want to bother him. However, after the movie it came to my attention he too wanted to walk out. If I had paid for this movie, I would have probably asked for my money back. It was terrible.

There was a glimmer of hope this weekend though and families didn't take enough advantage of it. While The Hangover Part II was the example of what you shouldn't do while making a sequel, Kung Fu Panda 2 was everything you do when you want to make a sequel right. The film was just spot-on. Instead of creating a movie that is step-by-step the original, it expanded on the first and moved forward, repeating some jokes from the first, but most of all creating more character development. In the first film, Po learns to accept himself for who he is. What Po discovers in this film is to accept his past and to focus on the present, to become at peace with himself. The villain was also fab. Gary Oldman's voice was so prefect for the peacock, I loved it. The film had a completely new story arc and I fell for it. I adored Kung Fu Panda 2 almost as much as I loved the first, and it just proves that sometimes that children's movies can be the better film. Just because you're over the age of 17 does not mean you can't watch a really solid and good animated film. They may sometimes be better than the raunchy R-rated movie.

At last! I shall give you my ratings (with my ratings of the first films as well).
The Hangover Part II: 1.5/5 (The Hangover: 4/5)
Kung Fu Panda 2: 3.5/5 (Kung Fu Panda: 4/5)

Wild Target (2010)

Wild Target - 4/5

I really enjoy British comedies when I get the chance to watch one, and this one is no different. This is a remake (but you wouldn't know), and despite that it's stays super quirky and fresh. With a huge and remarkable cast (Bill Nighy, Emily Blunt, and Rupert Grint to name a few), it is as well acted as any movie I've seen lately. It's fun, and it's not supposed to be anything else. There's no incredible life lesson that is to be learned, and the plot is very simple and nothing extra-ordinary. However, this movie has energy and keeps its audience laughing throughout.

This movie fell upon my radar because two of my favorite people are in it: Rupert Grint and Emily Blunt. They played the two major supporting characters, and they did it so well. Emily Blunt's character Rose kind of reverts back to her hilarious work on The Devil Wears Prada, which was the first movie I watched with her; and Rupert Grint fabulously breaks away from the Ron persona (of Harry Potter) really well, very much like he did with Driving Lessons. Bill Nighy played the assassin Victor Maynard and he was hilarious. I absolutely adored the way he would so nonchalantly kill all his victims in the beginning and his transformation was funny to watch.

Watching the movie on bluray was really fantastic, because the colors all popped out. The film itself was also really fast paced and it moved with such ease. I really enjoyed this movie, and would strongly recommend you go out to your nearest movie store or head on over to your netflix account and get it!

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tide -- 3/5

I am one of the hugest Pirates fans, and I love the first three ones ever so much (the first being in my top 15 movies of all time). I find them exciting, fun, and they always have something new going on. However, even though I enjoyed the new Pirates entry, I feel like it was a huge step down from the older ones and possibly (I bite my tongue now) an unneeded film to the series as a whole.

The film starts off like an average Pirates movie -- there's a goal (The Fountain of Youth) and our faithful Captain Jack Sparrow hasn't a plan, but is just moving forward with the motions. You are reintroduced to all the old characters (Barbossa and Gibbs) and then some new (Angelica played by Penelope Cruz and Blackbeard played by Ian McShane). It's interesting, it's funny, but there's something missing...and if you haven't noticed from the lack of their appearances in the posters and trailers, Will and Elizabeth are officially gone. Instead, they attempted to replace said couple with Philip (played by Sam Claflin) the Christian and Syrena (played by Astrid Berges-Frisbey) the Mermaid. If trying to force Jack with a lover was enough, the flimsy replacement of Will and Elizabeth is contrived, and overall I feel the movie would have done better without them at all. Sure, they needed the mermaid for the Fountain, but there was no need for Philip what-so-ever. He was easily eliminated and I honestly wish he had been. Their subplot was the worst part of the movie, and the extra 30 minutes they both added together just dragged the film down to the depths.

There were some enjoyable parts of the film. As always, Jack and Barbossa have some pretty witty banter, and a lot of the twists and turns to get to the Fountain are pretty cool. Also, the mermaids were dark and scary and I loved watching them attack the pirates. I really liked watching the movie, but sadly it just wasn't the best. However, I never expected it to excel without Will and Elizabeth anywho.

And BTW my previous Pirates ratings, just so you can compare:
Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl 4.5/5
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest 3.5/5

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End 4/5

Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy and My Impression on the Movie Series

Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy - 3.5/5

With this summer debatably having the most sequels of all time, everyone has their own opinions on serial movies. Do they work? Are they unoriginal? Why are they so popular? For some, when a favorite movie gets slapped with the foreboding green light to sequel, teeth cringe. This even happens to movies the person didn't terribly like either. Why is Hollywood so unoriginal? Why must they continue a story they already made and finished?
One would argue that it makes Hollywood loads of money. Some big-name series that have made it to theaters with very successful (if not more) sequels like Pirates of the Caribbean and Transformers create huge uproars. Why oh why do they want to make more of this "garbage"? Well, for starters both Pirates 2 and 3 are in the top 10 highest grossing movies of all time worldwide and Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is number 11 domestic making almost $100 million more than its predecessor. Obviously, it pays to sequel. What's so wrong with continuing a product that will make a company more money? Apple does it all the time with their "re-inventing" of the iphone. Why can't a movie company earn back more money so they can keep in business. They're also keeping their public happy with the continuation of films that super-fans really want to see more of.

However, this not only happens in Hollywood, but happens in every country with every popular movie franchise. People complain constantly saying it's Hollywood that's not original, but alas (!!): China has their very popular Love Undercover series and The Eye trilogy, and Korea has Marrying the Mafia I through III. So it's apparent that Hollywood is not the only country who has caught on to this sneaky marketing ploy. There are also series of films that are adapted from books like Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings. However, those usually aren't piled in and tagged with the dreadful "movie series" logo because those were lucky enough to be series in book form prior. So my question here is what's the different between a book and a film series? They're both stories, aren't they? Then we come to your very famous series that usually aren't worth complaining about like Star Wars, The Godfather, and the new Batman series (though maybe this is where I should mention The Godfather was actually a book too before being film).

Then here comes the dreaded horror sequel. The genre that easily has the "worst" and most "gimmicky" sequels and series of them all. They create something original that excites fans everywhere and then continue to make these huge box office money-makers (percentage-wise) and spew them out fairly cheaply. Some famous series that had great success would be Saw and Final Destination. Which brings me to the super long 4 hour documentary I watched tonight, Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy.

What this documentary showed me is that movie series are much more than what people give them credit for. At first I only found this doc interesting because they went into depth about how they make-uped, casted, and brought to life this huge film series (and mainly the first one). It was intriguing how much money they made off this series which actually molded the backbone of the production company New Line, which later on created the Oscar winning Lord of the Rings films. This series was a landmark. Although, it was the ending that really touched me. All the people that worked on it, whether it just be in one film or them all, really and truly cared about the series as a whole. Their blood, sweat, and tears went into this franchise that is now a milestone in the horror industry. You can't tell me that's not incredible. It's changed my view on the movie series and I really think people should hold their tongues before criticizing these huge money machines.

There were also some really interesting facts I learned from the documentary. Wes Craven actually got the idea of the dream-killer Freddy from a newspaper article on how a child was afraid to go back to sleep because he had a foreboding that he would die (and his fear came true). I also learned that for one of the later Freddy movies, Peter Jackson (of Lord of the Rings fame) wrote a script that didn't make the cut, but forever attached him to the New Line production company. This series did incredible things for directors, actors, and producers. So then I ask my question again, why do we condemn sequels all the time?

Bridesmaids

Bridesmaids: 3.5/5

Like many of her SNL co-comedians before, Kristen Wiig has recently taken the path into comedic film writing, and she doesn't fail. There are very few female-oriented comedies out there right now (the only other that comes to mind is Tina Fey's Mean Girls). Many of the recent raunchy comedies have the A-typical male cast: either Seth Rogan, Paul Rudd, Jonah Hill, or any other pick-your-SNL-comedian. With her co-cast of hilarious females, Wiig successfully creates an outrageously funny film without the help of the traditional "funny men."

The film itself explores female relationships that not since Mean Girls have been dissected, while romantic chick-flicks always regurgitate the same old female dynamics. Annie (Wiig) and Lilian's (Maya Rudolph) sister-like friendship really pulls the film forward and creates many laughs. The way Annie feels threatened by the beautiful and new "best friend" Helen (Rose Byrne) was super relatable. The two side-kick bridesmaids Becca (Ellie Kemper) and Rita (Wendi McLendon-Covey) were also equally funny with their contrasting characteristics. However, the character that generated the most roaring laughter had to be Megan (Melissa McCarthy). Megan knew no embaressment. Her character went places that would be tough for some women to go. She was rowdy, rude, was a little masculine, and above all held a pretty unattractive exterior. And that was the brilliance of her character. She was the male where the comedy needed a male, but she was disguised as a female, and she was hilarious.

The film's characters are the really special part of this film, and the feeding of their lines is what makes this movie a great one. There are some downfalls to this movie, however. The ending is super cliche, and the romantic side-story feels overkill at moments, but was needed for the story to come together. Aside from some minor issues though, the script was fantastically written and hopefully this proves that more females can write funny movies.