THE LEGITIMATE SEQUEL

MOVIE REVIEW:

THE HANGOVER PART III

By:

G.P. MANALO

Starring:

Bradley Cooper

Zach Galifianakis

Ed Helms

A movie like the Hangover wasn’t the kind of movie that you would expect to have a sequel (that will meanwhile form a trilogy). Long-story-short The Hangover is one of the best comedies out there but not something to give sequels to especially when it’s just a re-hash of its predecessor for the sake of getting even greater amount of cash. The only thing worth thinking about for a guy like me (who wasn’t a fan of the last film) is the legitimacy of this film as a sequel. Will this be the actual Hangover sequel or will it just be Hangover 1.9?

The Hangover Part III – The Wolfpack is back for one last adventure together; this time there is no wedding, no bachelor party, and no hangover. Alan has to be taken to a rehab facility because of his “odd” behavior.  They are meanwhile given a mission by a crime-lord known as, Marshall and that mission is to find Leslie Chow and his stolen stash of money from him for 3 days or their friend, Doug will die.

I was expecting a lot from this movie, from the previews I can tell that this could possibly be a legitimate sequel than Part II was supposed to be as it retires from the formula of the original and be a different movie and have a legitimate continuity as a sequel is supposed to be. Thankfully that did came true, I can say that this is a better sequel and movie than the last one but that is not saying much.

The movie is definitely different from the past two movies, like I said there is no hangover but just crazy shenanigans. The way it was executed was rather ballsy; the road it took us to is rather different than your average comedy, the movie is more of a thriller than a comedy but when they do plaster some bits of comedy in that road it did feel out of place, you feel the absence of the comedic element throughout the film when you watch intense scenes. When there was comedy in most of the intense scenes of this movie, I had the feeling of the movie not knowing its true identity, I would’ve liked it if they did stay with the thrilling element of the story but perhaps it is the writing’s fault for not thinking of something clever to pull off in the thrilling set-pieces.

The comedy on the other hand was lacking, there were a few hard laughs here and there (I think the part where I laughed the hardest was the post-credits scene), Most of the jokes feels forced in a lot of situations, the jokes overstay its welcome, there were a few jokes in the movie where it was a good and funny joke but they keep going instead of stopping in the punch line.  I believe those are my gripes about this movie. I was very much entertained with the action set-pieces throughout the movie, there was this one scene in Las Vegas where it was the edge-of-your-seat type of an action scene (almost felt like that Dubai Tower scene from Mission Impossible IV). Story-wise I thought that this movie did have a few genuine twists and the continuity did work, they don’t feel shoe-horned in the movie (like every re-hashed element from The Hangover Part II), the things where they would mention most of the things that happened in the past two movies actually helped progress the story, than it is shoe-horned in some way for the sake of being there for no reason at all. The movie having no hangover didn’t really bother me (It was a ballsy choice). I can see why people will be bothered by the fact that the one thing that made this movie what it is, is not in the movie.  

 Before I go into detail with the cast, the other main gripe I had with this movie is the fact on how they take Zach Galifianakis and Ken Jeong’s character to center stage too much. Admittedly they did have their moments, but the way they were focused gratuitously was unpleasant to watch. Zach Galifianakis’ Alan had the change of character in this movie where he is an asshole that is not the loveable type that he was in the first one, we’ve seen it in the second one and the way they handled that in this movie is even worse. It was bearable to watch him do some first world problem type of jokes and the obliviousness of the character did go out of hand that it ends up being annoying (my friend even labeled him as “the type of guys he would kill” that’s how annoying he was). What’s even worse is that his attitude was more of an excuse as a plot device, which was handled very poorly in the movie due to the lack of cleverness the writing did give him in this movie. Ken Jeong’s character is the focal point of this movie, he was funny for the most part in this movie but like Alan they went really crazy with his character, his character did have some moments where I laughed out loud in the theater but most of the times it is rather bearable to watch as well, the cast in every 10 seconds of the movie stresses the fact on how crazy or out of his mind, he is and they would say it out loud for the audience to understand.

 

The remaining cast like; Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms and Justin Bartha were just riding the train for this. Like I said earlier, the movie spends it’s time on doing comedic timing. These 3 actors had some little time to shine when it comes to comedy; they were more in the awkward position of the joke while Zach Galifianakis and Ken Jeong do their thing. John Goodman felt a bit under-used I wished they explored his character a little bit more, I would’ve like to see him bring out his comedic chops (maybe in a Big Lebowski-esque way) but he is more of the thriller-element than being the comedic element of the movie. Even, Melissa McCarthy is in this movie for the latter half, she felt like she was shoe-horned in there just to be a plot device for Zach Galifianakis’ character’s story, like John Goodman I was expecting that she’d bring out some of her famous comedic chops (especially when she was in a movie that is almost similar as The Hangover) as well but the writers didn’t really give her anything to do that much. Lastly, there were many cameos here from the first movie and those cameos did work and I enjoyed their scenes.

In the end, I enjoyed this movie to a limited extent (not really saying that much); the movie was lacking in laughs due to the mediocre writing as it never really decides the identity that the movie would keep. The movie was entertaining as it features (surprisingly) intense action, a few hard laughs and some chuckle-worthy jokes. Though most of the jokes in this movie feel forced as it left off being I wasn’t really expecting anybody to pull off an Oscar-worthy performance in a movie like this, the cast is still a stellar cast as they are talented (comedically). This is probably the best rental experience you can ever have if you are a fan of the first movie only but if you love the two movies and you want to see the story conclude, I’d say that you should wait for the ticket prices to go down.  Is it still unnecessary for this movie to have a trilogy? Yes, but now that it went too far it is too late to say, it is a solid conclusion to an unnecessary trilogy.

THE UPS:

+THRILLING ACTION SEQUENCES

+SOME FUNNY MOMENTS

+MOST OF THE PERFORMANCES IN THIS MOVIE
+GENUINE TWISTS
+STORYTELLING

THE DOWNS:

-FORCED PERFORMANCES

-FORCED COMEDIC TIMING

-THE JOKES OVERSTAYS ITS WELCOME

-A BAD MIX BETWEEN THRILLER AND COMEDY

- UNDER-USED COMEDIC ACTORS

MY RATING:

2.5/5 – RENTAL!

GLITZ AND GLAMOUR

MOVIE REVIEW:

THE GREAT GATSBY

(3D)

By:

G.P. Manalo

Starring:

Tobey Maguire

Leonardo DiCaprio

Carrey Mulligan

I believe that it is a challenge to adapt a literary classic with a stature like F. Scott Fitzgerald’s literary classic “The Great Gatsby” which is also known as “The book that many teenagers were forced to read in High School”. The Great Gatsby is such a beloved property that the fans are saying that this is one of those books that are rather “un-filmable” even if they did more than 3 film versions of the novel in the past. And of all the people to pick up this property is, Baz Luhrmann. Who is known for delivering energetic and over the top movies (haven’t seen Australia yet) that made us look at our watches for more than 5 times while watching his movies. The only thing worth expecting in properties like this is the fact that “Did this movie do the book justice?” (Or atleast “Did this movie not make F. Scott Fitzgerald roll in his grave?”)

The Great Gatsby – Is based on a book with the same name by F. Scott Fitzgerald, it follows an ambitious young man, Nick Carraway as he moves to a place next to a palace-like mansion owned by a mysterious man named, Gatsby. When he begins question about the mysterious man who lives next door to him, he was invited to his larger than life party that he throws every weekend. When he finally meets him in person not only does he discover more about him but also leads him to a risky scandal of Gatsby with Nick’s second cousin, Daisy who happens to be the wife of an wealthy and aggressive businessman, Tom Buchanan.

I was expecting a lot from this movie since I have re-read the movie just recently (If I said that my English teacher didn’t force me to read this, will you be surprised?). The movie seemed to have the (what I liked to call) Baz Luhrmann clichés as I see the previews, the movie felt like I will have a lot of pretty things to look at, there will be some stand out performances, it could possibly bore me, and there will be some over the top stuff. Most of these things did come true… Unfortunately.

First thing’s first, I have read the book but I don’t want to compare this and the book way too much because I don’t think that there is a point to it, that being said I thought that this movie did the book justice – for the most part. The movie did feel like it was almost adapted word for word, there are most lines that I remember was said in the book, the way Carraway narrates and describe his experiences and also The way they did set the stage for the Great Gatsby himself and his continuous obsession for the one thing he holds on to was set up really well. Though It didn’t really hit the right notes as the book did, the film carries everything important about the book but there wasn’t really a huge impact due to the pacing of the film. The film would begin energetically and towards the mid-section of the film it would be slow and presentation-like (where they would switch from one scene to the next), the film ends that is rather rushed and you left wishing that the ending could’ve been handled a tad bit better.

At first, what worries me was Baz Luhrmann’s direction in this movie; he’s more of a stylistic director (don’t get me wrong the visuals he handled in his past movies were pretty good to look at) but when he does actors the tendency of the performances would rather be “over the top” like his visuals. From what I heard from the critics, The movie is “style over substance” as the movie showcase the parties in the first half it did felt like that (which did work on scenes like that), in fact it was like an extended music video especially in the second and the last third of the movie, the visuals made this movie look cartoony which made it very distracting to look at, though most scenes that did feature the cartoony visuals did work and were entertaining to look at as it brings the familiar landmarks and scenery of the book to life in this movie. I thought the style brought the partying aspect of the movie to life well, since one of the concepts of the movie is about “Old Money” and how far people would go with that much money and power like Gatsby so I thought the style as they feature the parties (and the story itself during the second and third act) did work.

We’ve seen Baz Luhrmann tackle this kind of story before of lost love or romance in general, I thought Baz Luhrmann handled that aspect well in the movie. His modern-esque direction worked really well in the narrative of the movie and it somehow gave us a fresh enough take on the literary classic, though this film is still told a bit exaggerated from start to finish. When I did mention an extended music video I was also referencing the music in this movie. The music in this movie is a love-hate relationship to me; the music has this jazz feel that is really authentic to the timeline, but in the mix there’s a lot of modern sound to it (from Jay-Z, Beyonce, Will.I.am., etc.) which for the most part didn’t really fit very well. I thought the addition of jazz-hip-hop songs was a very ballsy move for this movie. I was fine with most of the choices as long as that move wasn’t done just to cash in for the soundtrack sales. The visuals in this movie are a little bit over blown, most of the time they will look good while others could've been easily filmed without the green screen,  they are rather distracting to look at.

The performances in the film have both weak and great performances; most of them are even perfectly casted as their characters. I thought Leonardo DiCaprio is perfectly casted for the great Gatsby himself, If I can remember reading the book and heard that Leo was chosen for the role I can actually envision him as Gatsby the entire time of reading the book. Like I said earlier, they did handle his side of the story well enough and he is literally the best parts of the film. But Leonardo DiCaprio was not the only one who is the best in this film, Joel Edgerton’s version of Tom Buchanan is depicted well on-screen and Joel Edgerton surprisingly did a very good performance (he came a long way from being young Uncle Owen in the trilogy that needs to be forgotten). Though Tobey Maguire’s Nick Carraway was just “OK”, he’s one of those characters where I wished the filmmakers would have taken liberties on.  He is still a (bit) one-dimensional character, he wasn’t also properly developed when he is around characters and presenting the story itself, him having an impact or a real relationship with one of the characters were rather vague. Carey Mulligan’s Daisy is also just “alright”, her performance was a bit over the top and cartoonish at some point.

In the end, The Great Gatsby is a faithful enough adaptation to F.Scott Fitzgerald’s literary classic. It does feature monumental imagery and scene from the book that will make the fans of the book be happy of what they just saw. Though the scenes of the monumental events of the book was rather lacking in terms of impact and development as you do leave the theater wanting more from the film. Though the characters are well casted enough and most of the performances were rather weak with a few considerations like Leonardo DiCaprio and Joel Edgerton. If you are a huge fan of the book, this could be both a love-hate relationship for you, if you are just a casual film-goer it’s not really something to rush to the theaters.

THE GOOD:

+BOTH DECENT AND GREAT PERFORMANCE

+THE VISUALS

+MUSIC

+FAITHFUL ENOUGH TO THE BOOK

THE BAD:

- MESSY PACING

-LACKING EMOTIONAL WEIGHT

-MOST OF THE VISUALS WERE OVERBLOWN 

MY RATING:

3/5 - NOT THAT BAD, NOT THAT GOOD

DYNAMIC

MOVIE REVIEW:

STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS (3D)

Starring:

Chris Pine

Zachary Quinto

Benedict Cumberbatch

4 Years Ago, J.J. Abrams Star Trek (2009) was one of the best examples of a “franchise reboot done right”, But he also made a dead franchise be relevant for both the fans of the old (maybe a fraction of the fans) and casual movie-goers in general. And now he returns into the universe again to continue the adventures of the (fresh-faced) crew that we know and loved as he promise the sequel to a larger scale as he bring us into a speedy warp, the only question floating into everyone’s mind (besides John Harrison being Khan or not) Is that “Will J.J. Abrams do it again?”

Star Trek: Into Darkness – takes place years after the first movie as it follows Captain Kirk and his crew of the enterprise. In this, they face a highly unlikely threat known as “John Harrison” as he threatens a personal vendetta against the federation by wreaking havoc. Kirk and his crew are meanwhile assigned to go through enemy lines to find and terminate him but when they do meet him he leads them to a discovery that will cost their lives.

What can I say? It’s almost impossible to not to anticipate for this movie (In my list of anticipated movies of 2013, this is my second most anticipated movies of the year.). All the secrecy (Thanks for fluffing it out EW), every trailer just made the movie look EPIC (until I stopped at the third trailer) gets me excited for this movie. And now that it is finally here…. All the excitement was worth it, I’m very happy to say that this movie is an exciting thrill-ride and probably one of the best movies I’ve seen this year.

The movie is literally energized, from start to finish expect really intense and and at the same time the movie would stop necessarily to give development and emotional depth to the characters and yet it didn’t feel forced at all (*cough* G.I. Joe: Retaliation). That’s what I love about the original series, TNG and the 2009 Star Trek, the crew’s dynamic was the one that drives the stories, it is the heart and soul of each incarnation and it really shows in this movie even more than the last one. Everyone had their moment to shine even if it was just a brief but relevant and entertaining sequence. The dynamic of this crew of people was so well done that you are very much attached to these characters in every dangerous situation they are in (So attached, that at some point I almost shed manly tears in this movie)

I honestly thought there wasn’t a bad performance in this movie at all. Chris Pine did a very good performance in this movie (surprisingly). I did nit-picked the fact that for the lesser part of Star Trek 2009 that they gave emphasis to him being a rule-breaker/asshole too much and be an excuse that this was Kirk before we knew him as a matured person (and maybe with a speech impediment), here he is a rule breaker but his action makes sense they are not just benefiting for himself but for others, I like how they give emphasis on how this character did mature in this movie. But what I love the most that revolves around his character is his chemistry or should I call it “Bro-mance” with Spock, the writers built up a very good friendship around these two characters. Zachary Quinto is great as always that you feel like that he is born to play this role as he did nail the original Spock’s nuances.

Speaking of nuances, Karl Urban as Bones was also brilliant in this film; the writers blessed him with Bones’ amusing classic one liners and out-of-nowhere metaphors. Simon Pegg as Scotty; also shared a great amount of hilarity as he boldly go in his own journey at some point of the movie. Zoe Saldana as Uhura I felt a little bit under-written, she came off as a bit of that naggy girlfriend from the first half of the movie, she did show some relevance for the most part. There were more moments for Anton Yelchin’s Chekov and John Cho’s Sulu and like I said most characters did do stuff in rather brief moments but they were good enough moments for their development.  There were new comers in this movie such as Robocop himself, Peter Weller as Marcus who had a titular role in this movie was good for the most part, and also Alice Eve as Carol who did not really do much in the movie other than to look hot and have a bit of relevance. But the one who really stole the show in this movie is (BBC) Sherlock himself, Benedict Cumberbatch as John Harrison. I thought he was a great villain in this movie; in fact he is everything a villain was to me. He had that brilliant on-screen presence from the intimidating deep voice to the unpredictability on his face.

If Star Trek fans thought that the last movie had less to offer for them wait till you see the fan-services in this movie, most fan-service/tributes in this movie felt like a love-letter to the one that is referencing it to. The movie had a checklist full of references to the original series and movies that will likely make a Trekkie (or a Trekker to some who preferred it to be called that way). The movie is straight-forward in a good way that it did felt like an extensive episode of a tv show at some point, the plot is simpler and easier to follow than the last one (honestly, it took me two viewings to fully understand the last one) you can sniff most of the things in this movie if you are familiar with previous Star Trek lore, though there were a few moments in this movie where it did caught me off guard. J.J. Abrams continues to prove that he can be a great action director, the movie is literally a thrill-ride with almost never-ending action set-pieces, the movie is 2 ½ hours long but it felt like less than that. This is a thrill ride that has the right amount of substance than being a mindless movie that the previews advertise it to be. I watched this movie in 3D, I would’ve loved to see this movie in IMAX 3D but I unfortunately don’t have the money right now to watch movies in IMAX but the regular 3D was a decent experience. It could be just me because in the first 30 minutes in this movie where there were some dark scenes I can barely see what’s going on in those scenes, there were also some long stops where you feel that the 3D felt unnecessary, though there were great shots in there as well of spears being thrown at you (that spear in the beginning made my brother dodge it), some space debris, volcano ashes and lens flares (and there I thought lens flares in 2D weren’t enough).

In the end, I definitely loved and enjoyed this movie very much. This movie is a perfect example of a Summer Blockbuster, its action packed but with the right amount of substance to it.  J.J. Abrams (I can’t wait to see what he will do Star Wars Episode VII) did a brilliant job directing this movie as he gives us a roller coaster ride of a movie, it’s everything a summer movie should have and it is intense and almost larger than life action set pieces that will very much entertain you. There’s many to offer for Star Trek fans new and old and also for casual movie-goers alike. I highly recommend you this movie immediately, avoid seeing this in 3D it’s not really something to pay full price for. Enjoy this movie in 2D and for 2D alone (I heard IMAX 3D is great but that’s not for me to judge.).

THE GOOD:

+THE DYNAMIC BETWEEN EACH CHARACTER

+FAN-SERVICE

+EXCELLENT WRITING AND DIRECTING

+THE PERFORMANCES

+BRILLIANT ACTION

THE BAD:
-NONE

MY RATING:

5/5 – EPIC WIN!

THE MAN BEHIND THE MASK

MOVIE REVIEW - IRON MAN 3

By:
G.P. MANALO

Starring:

Robert Downey Jr.

Gwyneth Paltrow

Ben Kingsley

After Marvel’s The Avengers gracing our screens last summer as it shreds box office records, what’s next? Marvel’s next big move is Phase 2, another series of big movies building up to the next Avengers film. And Phase 2 kicks off with Iron Man 3, the third entry and maybe the final entry to our favorite Avenger (Don’t worry Hulk you’re my no.1). Jon Favreu left the directing job and passes the torch to Shane Black who is known for writing the classic Lethal Weapon and 2005’s Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. The only question is left to him being able to upgrade the series or a downgrade? Here’s my review on Iron Man 3.

Iron Man 3 – Takes place after The Avengers, Tony Stark finds himself getting traumatized by the fact that he is at his most vulnerable because of his discovery of beings that are more powerful than him. Now, that fear is coming to life when an international terrorist rises from infamy, The Mandarin who is threatening the globe and a ghost from the past, Aldrich Killian both seek to destroy and threaten Tony Stark and the people close to him. And when they threaten one of them, Tony Stark decides to put matters in his own hands to seek and destroy The Mandarin by himself.

It’s no surprise that I am very excited for the third installment of Iron Man 3; I had really high expectations that this will not just be better than the last one but also be as good as or maybe even better than the first Iron Man. But I’m also curious on how director, Shane Black will give a “new road” to the movie because the previews did show that this is more of a “grounded” road that people tend to compare this to Nolan’s direction to the Batman movies. I couldn’t really call the 2^nd Iron Man a “sequel” to the first Iron Man because it was more of a commercial for the Avengers than a sequel. Now that we finally have this movie flying to our theaters, I’m very happy to say that this movie very much so exceeded all of my expectations and I can actually call this a legitimate sequel.

Director, Shane Black upped the scale that is even bigger than the last two movies and as a result he was able to take this series to a different road and delivered (probably) the best Iron Man movie in the series; not really the more grounded road that people would compare to Nolan’s “The Dark Knight” series but it felt like it has a tone of an 80s action film which is ironic because Shane Black wrote the classic “Lethal Weapon”( and other really great movies like “The Last Boyscout” and “Kiss Kiss Bang Bang”).  When, Tony Stark is not in the armor they were able to do some creatively well thought out action scenes with the character. The action scenes of him using everyday materials into something he can use against some enemies was pretty well thought out that it felt like it was something his character in the Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes films would do so. And yet when he is in the armor the action becomes intense, thrilling and exciting, when I said earlier that the action upped the scale I mean it, it is more than just him blasting stuff up in mid-air, The visuals were able to bring classic armors and did an incredible climactic action scene by the end and also translates the Extremis soldiers very well on-screen. The way the previews make this movie, I was worried that they might forcibly (overly) ground the character of Tony Stark to be part of the “in-crowd” of making things dark and depressing. Like I said it didn’t necessarily take the road of being dark and depressing, it had hints of it but wasn’t likely that it was taking that road. 

Tony Stark is at his most vulnerable in this movie and I like it when they illustrate that sometimes heroes are not really an unstoppable force of justice. It never lost the comedic- light hearted feel of the movie, the character of Tony Stark can still pitch some clever and hilarious scenes and one-liners throughout the film. But I do have one little thought that I do want to reserve for a while until I see more from the other movies and that is "Where is SHIELD?", "There's a terrorist in American soil? where's Captain America (the list goes on); the movie had very little important references. I don't want too many references since that was the flaw of the last Iron Man movie but I do wish they reference a few important things to tie-in to a few movies, maybe they'll reveal it in Captain America: The Winter Soldier or other movies. The movie was a little bit self-contained to connect to the future "Phase 2" movies but for now I will be reserving my thoughts about it until I see some more stuff.  But my real gripe about the movie is that the concept of the Extremis storyline was very under-told. They took ideas of the storyline but not the entirety of it, There was barely a time where they stopped and explained that concept for a little bit and it did suffer for the most part. 

Though as much as I want to say this is rather a light-hearted film than an edgier film, the movie surprisingly features tons of hilarious comedic dialogue though there were most scenes where it doesn't really need to be funny (especially when shit was serious). There were very serious scenes in the movie and out of nowhere Tony Stark will do some slapstick comedy or say something witty when he witnessed something that could possibly scar a man for life. It did took me out of the film. 

It’s also a no big surprise that Robert Downey Jr. still kills it as Tony Stark a.k.a Iron Man, like I said he was still entertaining as he spew out some hilarity but Shane Black was able to take another side of Tony Stark that we may have not seen before. It’s not his usual performance of being this jokey type of person. Shane Black took some time to develop him further to show how damaged he really, how big of an impact the “battle of new york” was to him, how it built him to be a hero and the struggle of becoming. He was able to wring out a great performance from him. But I was most curious about how will they handle The Mandarin in this movie. Surprisingly, they took an interesting twist to the character that is very (VERY) ballsy and it may not be for a comic book buff’s liking, me being one of those people I will not compare the comics to the movies, that’s just not my thing. Let an existing lore exist on its own there is no point in comparing an existing lore to another. That being said, I thought Ben Kingsley was able to deliver an entertaining performance nonetheless. It’s not the version of Mandarin that I wanted to be but Ben Kingsley’s performance did make it up. Speaking of surprises, Guy Pearce is probably the most fleshed out villain in the series. I thought that he played an exceptional villain in this movie; he had the right amount of menace and threat factor throughout the movie.

Though, I thought the weakest link was Rebecca Hall’s character Maya Hansen was barely fleshed out throughout the film, I just wished she was developed a little bit more and have a role that is bigger than it could’ve been. The returning cast like Gwyneth Paltrow and Don Cheadle; continues to be great as well. I liked how they expanded characters like Don Cheadle as James Rhodes/War Machine/Iron Patriot in this new movie, which I thought was a bit lacking in the last movie. He shared a really good amount of screen time with co-star Robert Downey Jr. as they share a partnership like Mel Gibson and Danny Glover did in Lethal Weapon. They also expanded characters like Jon Favreu's Happy Hogan giving him a very pivotal role than just a cameo and also Gwyneth Paltrow giving her more to do than being a damsel in distress. Last but not the least; I want to mention this kid in the movie. There was this kid that Tony Stark partnered with for a little while. When they brought this kid in I was about to dread of what to come, basically to me when a kid is in a movie sometimes it could be a kiss of death to your movie if they weren’t handled very well. But they did handle that aspect of the movie very well and I thought their partnership, the "heart-felt" relationship and  the comedic scenes between them were pretty well done.

In the end, Iron Man 3 may be the best out of the series; Marvel’s Phase 2 is off to a good start with Iron Man 3, Iron Man 3 is an exceptional comic book movie as it corrects every flaw it did from the last Iron Man movie.  Shane Black was able to deliver a smart, fun, fast-paced and entertaining film and he also upped the scale of action and storytelling as it tells a more personal story without relying on forced references for the Avengers and overly grounding the film, though one flaw of the movie is explaining its core concept. Iron Man 3 has exciting, thrilling, incredible almost larger than life action scenes that will entertain you from start to finish. The cast was able to give out convincing drama and hilarity that is entertaining as well though some showed its weakness. I highly recommend you see this immediately in theaters, though I do not see the rush in seeing this on a 3D format. Fans and non-fans of the series will love this movie but I don’t know if some comic book fans will accept some twists that regard the villains in this movie. This may be the last time we will see our high-flying Avenger in a solo movie and if it is so, it was a great run and it concluded very well. 

THE GOOD:

+STORYTELLING 

+ACTION SEQUENCES

+MOST PERFORMANCES

+CORRECTS THE FLAWS OF THE LAST MOVIE

THE BAD: 

-AN ANTI-CLIMACTIC PAY-OFF

-SOME WEAK PERFORMANCE AND STORY DEVELOPMENT

-OUT OF PLACE COMEDIC DIALOGUE

MY RATING:

4/5 - FOR THE WIN! 

GORE FEST

MOVIE REVIEW - EVIL DEAD (2013)

By:

G.P. MANALO

Starring:

Jane Levy

Shiloh Fernandez

Lou Taylor Puchi

Of all the classic horror movies like Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween, Friday the 13^th, Night of the Living Dead. Sam Raimi’s 1981 classic, Evil Dead was the most influential and remembered horror movie for its ingenuity, its classic story, and the fact that it was made in a ham-sandwich budget and yet it was able to deliver a quality horror film. Now with the fad of re-making classic horror movies most re-makes/re-imaginings never really live up to the quality of their predecessors. Did this re-make follows the same bloody footsteps as they did or did it instead give us something fresh than something rotten?

Evil Dead – Is a re-make of the 1981 classic and it tells the story of 5 young adults moving in to a remote cabin to help their friend, Mia from getting through her drug addiction. They meanwhile find themselves in a satanic nightmare when they find a trapdoor to a secret hatch, one of them happens to have found and read a mysterious book that made one of them become possessed by a demon.

I was very much looking forward to seeing Evil Dead, I was a huge fan of the classic Evil Dead movies and Army of The Darkness. When I heard that they are doing a Sneak Preview for the movie in the cinema near me I went out of my way to see it and it was worth it.  I’m very happy to say that this movie is a quality horror movie that happens to be a modern re-make. Director, Fede Alvarez and Producers, Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell actually cares for the material and all of them shared this passion in delivering a quality horror movie that is very loyal to its beloved material and I for one had a very good time with this movie.

Fans of the classic movies and Horror fans will be happy that the movie did live up to the classic very well (even if they did not have Ash Williams in it) and be entertained by some scares and gory imagery.  The marketing team boasts about this movie being “The Most Terrifying Movie You Will Ever See…. Ever” Did it live up to it? In my point of view; the movie had disturbingly gory imagery (It’s really fucked up) throughout the movie that will likely make a lot of people be terrified as they leave the theater. But not to me, It was more disturbing than genuinely scary but I can see why others can be terrified by this movie nonetheless. If most horror re-makes are updated with CGI, this is updated with a large barrel full of gore (lots and lots of gore). It is very impressive that thus movie were done with practical effects and that is very rare to see nowadays because of the usage of Computer Generated effects (CGI). They take the usage of practical effects to its advantage. The sense of realism and the usage of practical effects added so much to that imagery that it could make someone cringe for hours. Though I do wish the scares would be a little more genuine, scenes of the possessed person appearing behind them did become tiring the more they use it, there were scares here and there that did felt genuinely scary (enough) but I do wish the movie was like that overall. I can’t really go through this review without mentioning this movie called “Cabin in the Woods” which basically borrows the plot of the 1981 Classic and Horror movies in general, It must be very difficult to do this movie after that movie coming out when all the tricks in horror movies are revealed. The Cabin In the Woods was very much like that show “Magic’s biggest Secrets”.

When it comes to re-makes as much as I want them to stay loyal to the material, I really don’t want a carbon copy of the original being updated with modern-day special effects. There were a lot of flourishes of new things to offer in this re-make. The story is a step-up from the classic, they have a reason to go to this cabin and why should they stay anyways when they began to experience weird things, I thought that it was a believable. but if I would have a little nit-pick about the story and it would be that giving the reason why they had to read the book when they are told not to, they should’ve took the route of “I know this ancient language that you don’t understand so I’ll read it” route but you (even I) learned to accept it anyways that they didn’t take that route and that’s why It’s not really much of a gripe to me. It’s also darker and more serious than the Raimi movies as well; the old movies had that scary yet campy vibe to them that you can actually laugh out loud by the in-jokes being delivered in the old ones. At first I thought of that change could’ve not been changed because I wanted some characters to at least have a personality to some characters (because most characters feels very similar except the odd ball) but as I continue watching in the movie I don’t think it needed some comedy because of serious the situations are. The characters were literally labeled immediately on the spot at one scene where "hey, you're the smart one", "you're the weird one" and "this is my girlfriend" my little nit-pick about that scene was the fact how obvious that they introduce their character that way, but that's just a nit-pick honestly.  There are some homages and easter eggs that were cleverly put together in this movie, the camera swooping through the forest, the red chainsaw, the tree branch rape, the shotgun, and more. Fans of the classic will enjoy picking those little things throughout the movie.

 

To be quick about the performances (since I am very much aware of the fact that they aren’t trying to get nominated for an Oscar or something like that) I thought that Jane Levy stole the show as this junkie who got possessed, when she was possessed I thought she outshines all of the actors in this movie. I did like Shiloh Fernandez and Lou Taylor Pucci of all the people in the cast (especially Jane Levy) I thought they were the ones with actual depth and personality to them (I know I shouldn’t be looking at these kinds of things at Horror movies but I just couldn’t resist sometimes).

In the end, I had a bloody great time with this movie. This Evil Dead is everything a horror-remake should be; Its relevant, It gives something new to the table, do necessary changes, loyal to the beloved material and be gorily scary (scary enough) and when they all add up they will be  an entertaining horror film overall. Evil Dead is the best horror re-make to date and the best horror movie of the year. Fans of the classic will be very pleased that this movie was handled with care by a great director like Fede Alvarez and producers, Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell. I highly recommend you see this immediately when the movie is still having a sneak preview in an Ayala Mall theater near you and in case you missed make sure to mark your calendars when it gets released in May 8^th. But for those Evil Dead fans (or those who have seen the 3 movies at least) there’s something for you in the after credits of this movie.

THE GOOD:

+USAGE OF PRACTICAL EFFECTS

+A STEP UP TO THE ORIGINAL

+ SOME INTENSE SCARES

+3 PERFORMANCES

THE BAD:

(NIT-PICKS)

-NOT ENOUGH GENUINE SCARES

-REPETITIVE SCARES

-UNDERDEVELOPED CHARACTERS

MY RATING:

4.5/5 – FOR THE WIN!

CONVOLUTION

MOVIE REVIEW:

OBLIVION

By:
G.P. MANALO

Starring:

Tom Cruise

Morgan Freeman

Olga Kurylenko

Oblivion – Takes place in the year 2077, when mankind was evacuated from earth after it was attacked by an intergalactic threat. Jack and Victoria are the only ones left on earth as they extract earth’s remaining resources. Complications occur when Jack’s recurring dreams of his past gets in the way and a bigger threat that he discovered.

I was curious about Oblivion; I was intrigued to see this movie by the cast and the visuals shown in the trailers, but the story – I wasn’t really crazy with.  Going into this movie, I had that feeling where the movie will be very convoluted because as shown in the previews there was so much story going on that it feels like that it is more than one storyline (I counted 2-3 storylines were done in this movie),  And that unfortunately did came true.

The movie is written and directed by Joseph Kosinski, the same guy who brought us Tron: Legacy three years ago.  I was not the biggest fan of the movie though I enjoy it very much, but going back to the topic; the reason why I referenced Tron: Legacy is because it suffered the same flaws this movie did. The movie suffers from under-written characters, plot and also over-explanatory events that took place in the movie. To go into detail I want to mention the story first before all else, I can say that the premise is very good; admittedly the first hour of this movie was a pretty good set-up for the characters and the story itself, but you leave wanting something more. The movie spends its time on what I like to call “Shyamalan-ing”, where they build multiple things up for a big plot twist (in this case: Plot twists); there were multiple plot twists in this movie both you can sniff something from the beginning and some are something that you cannot see coming and yet for that the movie suffered in terms of pacing, the pacing did seem very off in this movie as it would go in a fast pace and become drastically slow again.

To talk about the performances real quick, As much as I thought Tom Cruise as an actor is an impressive actor physically and professionally (he’s a nutjob, sure but you have to admit he’s a very exceptional actor) and he did bring a good enough performance in this movie I thought that his character was a bit under-written along with Morgan Freeman, (who also did a great performance) who happens to be the antagonist of this movie and pretty much the rest of the cast. Morgan Freeman’s character is very under-written, he along with the gang he had in the movie felt very un-needed in the long run it is the writing’s fault at that I just wished that their side of the plot was developed a little bit more to work with the big climax and reveals. The remaining cast members like Andrea Riseborough and Olga Kurylenko.

This movie is without a doubt, visually stunning and it does result to very enjoyable action sequences and very surreal and photo-realistic imagery. The use of CGI and surprising enough the usage of practical effects are very impressive as it brings a surreal vision of the distant future to life on-screen. I like how these visuals have some visual-nods (inspirations) to various sci-films such as Hitchhiker’s guide to the galaxy and 2001: A Space Odyssey.

In the end, despite its flaws I manage to enjoy Oblivion from the first half of the film and some parts in the second half (that last fight scene was pretty mind-blowing, I have to admit). The movie had its pros to the performances, the visuals and the fantastic score from M83 (which I didn’t put into detail in the review), and the set-up to this movie was very good though it wasn’t executed very well in the long-run. The movie still suffers from a messy pacing, very under-written characters and overly-explanatory situations (due to the occasional “Shyamalan-ing”). You may enjoy this movie for the visuals and most parts of the first and second half, I wouldn’t recommend to see this movie immediately; it’s more of a “See it if you’re bored” type of movie.

THE GOOD:

+THE SET-UP

+GOOD PERFORMANCES

+VISUALS

+M83 DID THE SCORE

THE BAD:

-MESSY PACING

-UNDER-WRITTEN CHARACTERS

-EXECUTION

-SHYAMALAN-ING

MY RATING:

3.5/5 – SEE IT, IF YOU’RE BORED (MATINEE!)

UNPREDICTABILITY

MOVIE REVIEW:

THE CROODS

By:

G.P. MANALO

Starring:

Emma Stone

Nicholas Cage

Ryan Reynolds

The Croods – takes place during the stone-age and it tells the story about a family who has survived long enough because of their daily routine (which is not doing anything). The eldest daughter, Eep is getting tired of her over-protective father controlling his family from leaving the cave. But when one accident destroyed their home they found themselves adapting to this new world they discovered. As they trek into this world they end up meeting new people, discovering new things and different kinds of danger in this new world. But the stakes got higher in their journey when they soon realize that the world is collapsing (dun dun duuuuun).

I was not really looking forward to seeing, The Croods. Honestly the reason why this is a very late review is because of two things: 1. this movie was released in my finals week and 2. I was avoiding this movie. But when I heard good word about this movie being “good” and “how the trailers were all wrong about this movie” I got myself into seeing this movie and I end up kicking myself for avoiding this movie in the first place. I actually did enjoy the movie for its surprises, its inventiveness and how it wasn’t everything I thought it could be.

When I saw the previews for this it looked so generic in a bad way. I think that’s the flaw of Dreamwork’s marketing team where they try to be secretive like Pixar but they do it in a bad way because they didn’t really intrigue most of the audience right from the trailer. There were so much clichés in this movie that didn’t translate very well as I have judged in the previews; you have the cliché of the over protective parent, the rebellious kid (who happens to be a red head), the fish-out-of-water storyline, the crazy family, but as a result.. It actually worked. Little did I know Chris Sanders (He wrote and directed How to Train Your Dragon and Lilo and Stitch) wrote and directed this movie, what made him special? He puts a large amount of heart and depth to everyday movie clichés and he really does well translating family problems into his stories, it shows in “Lilo and Stitch” (the sister-sister relationship) and “How to Train Your Dragon” (the father and son relationship) that you have sworn that they do feel like the everyday family.

In this movie it shows the amount of heart and depth he put to the story and the amount of personality and charm being given to each character; each character feels relevant and share a very good dynamic to each other right from the get-go, they feel like a real family that really stay together and love each other. In fact, I liked how the messages of adapting to new things and how you have to get out of your comfort zone were delivered in this movie; it would probably be have an impact to you. It wasn’t “deeply” delivered for kids to float around their heads and I thought that those morals were delivered simply for it to be understood by both adults and children alike. In the comedic writing, I thought that there were clever in-jokes throughout the movie and jokes in general. Surprisingly there were a lot of adult humor and less childish humor. But most of the jokes did fall flat, I know it’s a kids’ movie but I wasn’t really much of a fan with the childish humor of this movie (thankfully it has nothing to do with farts or shit jokes), It was very awkward to watch. I think that would be one small gripe.

The Animation in this movie is pretty much Dreamworks at its finest, I just love how they thought of creating this world. I’ve always admire Dreamwork’s Ingenuity at creating specific worlds whether it will be an underground world for rats, a place where people like Santa Claus, The Tooth Fairy or the Easter Bunny would live in and maybe even a place similar to Beverly Hills but with a fairy tale twist, the list goes on and sometimes I admire their ingenuity in the writing department (comedically and dramatically) as well.  The way they made this world with very lush environment had that artsy- photorealistic feel to it and the inhabitants (the animals) were really well thought out bringing that nostalgic feel of the Wuzzles (If you don’t get the reference, you’re probably part of the younger democratic).  The animation overall for the characters, was smooth and rightly over the top and It is very good to see in 3D, Dreamworks really knows how to work with 3D and they never disappoint every time they do 3D movies; Every detail of the world, the characters or small things in general really pops out of the screen and It is worth the price of admission.

Voice-acting wise is really nothing amazing honestly, when it comes to voice acting I always wish they would make me not recognize the famous voice actor behind the character. An example like last year’s Rise of the Guardians I barely noticed it was Alec Baldwin doing a Russian accent or even in Megamind I barely recognized Will Farrell and Brad Pitt as Megamind and Metro Man.  Here you can notice that it is Emma Stone, Nicholas Cage and Ryan Reynolds when they start talking. But as they go on you don’t mind it, especially for Nicholas Cage the more when he does his trademark crazy antics really work with the character he is playing, Emma Stone and Ryan Reynolds were just alright. The rest like Clark Duke, Cloris Leechman and Catherine Keneer leaves out as “not bad”. Chris Sanders who have voiced Stitch in the past years played a similar character in this movie called “Belt”, his cutesy voice really fits the character very well and he does have a lot jokes here and there that revolves around him will keep you amused along with your kids.

In the end, The Croods is a very surprising movie, I surprisingly enjoyed this movie and even I have to admit I almost had man tears by the end. It has the best animations and have surprising amount of heart and depth story-wise and character-wise. The animation is Dreamwork at their finest, every inch of detail pops out of the screen with fantastic shots in 3D. The movie is fun for the whole family; it is enjoyable for both adults and children alike (trust me; I was in a cinema full of them).

THE GOOD:

+THE ANIMATION

+SOME GOOD JOKES

+SOME OK VOICE ACTING

+THE 3D

+THE MORALS

+STORY TELLING

THE BAD:

-TERRIBLE CHILDISH JOKES

-SOME VOICE ACTING COULD'VE BEEN A BIT BETTER

 MY RATING:

4/5 - FOR THE WIN!