Frozen

http://25.media.tumblr.com/9bb4fbeb8bc3de3cff3ff5715ec87a87/
tumblr_mpqh2iWbhF1r94mgyo1_500.png

Isn't it a tad ironic that a movie about the cold can make you feel so warm inside? Well, Frozen has that power. With its aesthetically breathtaking animation and gleefully lighthearted atmosphere, Frozen charms enough to melt even the coldest of ice hearts.

Elsa, daughter of the king and queen, is born with the power to freeze anything and create snow and ice out of thin air. As a child, she accidentally freezes her younger sister, Anna. Fearing her powers will become too dangerous, Elsa's parents hide her away in her bedroom. Meanwhile, Anna grows up without the company of her big sister.

When it comes time for Elsa to take the throne, the coronation ceremony takes a bad turn when Elsa's powers are exposed. Fearing for her life upon being labeled a sorceress, Elsa exiles herself to the mountains, accidentally putting her kingdom in a permanent state of winter. Anna runs after her sister, leaving her new fiancé Prince Hans in charge of the kingdom. She is soon joined by ice salesman Kristoff, his reindeer Sven, and a walking-talking snowman named Olaf.

As much as I hate to say it, Frozen was not without its flaws. One thing I noticed was the heavy borrowing from Shrek (which, to be fair, borrowed a lot more from classic Disney than Frozen did from it). Olaf was their attempt Donkey. Attitude wise, Anna was a bit like Princess Fiona, with the same outgoing personality and desire for familial unity. Elsa also took a piece from Fiona: her backstory of the King's daughter locked away in a tower for her own good. There was also turmoil over whether Anna will choose to love Hans or Kristoff, conveyed in a similar way to Shrek 2's Prince Charming vs. Shrek.

Hans' character shift towards the end of the movie was totally unforeseeable in the worst possible way, and it was obvious that the sudden change of heart existed solely to bring about the movie's cliché ending. Although I was extremely fond of Olaf the Snowman, it was clear by the way he was introduced that he was only in the movie for comic relief. And even though his character probably made me laugh the most, he deserved a better introduction to the story than a "Hey! It's halfway through the movie, and you don't have an oddball sidekick yet. Don't worry...here I am!" As talented as Idina Menzel is, her singing voice was too showcase for the timid Elsa, and during her solo "Let It Go," Menzel's voice became a distraction. The song itself is great (I bought it on iTunes earlier today), but the vocals were just too "big" for the character. Elsa herself was also undersold during the movie. Where the bulk of the screen time went to Anna, I needed to see more of Elsa since her character was so captivating.

Returning to the plusses, Frozen has a lot of things to say about family, love, commitment, rationality, and self-perception, and says them in quite the enjoyable way. The smart and witty screenplay keep things moving at a solid pace, as do the catchy songs and score compositions. While all of the characters have their merits (even the reindeer Sven), you never want to take your eyes off Anna. Her spunky and fearless approach to life is extremely uplifting. Kristen Bell was highly impressive with her voice work for Anna, as was Josh Gad for Olaf. While I don't think Frozen will enjoy the longevity of Disney greats like The Lion King or even Mulan, it's always nice to be reminded that Disney rarely disappoints.

Rating: 4/5

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

I made a big mistake before going to see The Hunger Games: Catching Fire: I read the book first. And so by my own fault, I went in expecting certain things from the movie, as well as already knowing what would happen. When I left the theater, I wondered why I had no real definitive thoughts on the movie adaptation and realized my mistake was going into Catching Fire as a book reader and not as a movie goer. 36 hours later, I was back in the theater, hoping to see the movie in a new light, and after my second viewing, my eyes were opened to how fantastic Catching Fire was.

Just before the 75th Hunger Games are to begin, Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) and Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson), winners of the 74th Hunger Games, head off on their Victory Tour throughout the dystopian land of Panem. Before they embark, President Snow (President by name, Dictator by practice, portrayed by Donald Sutherland) warns Katniss that her actions in the arena have sparked a rebellion, and in order for her loved ones to live, she must convince the people of Panem that she loves Peeta, and more importantly, the Capitol itself, to squash the rebellion before it occurs.

Despite appearing to fall for Peeta and getting engaged, Snow isn't happy with victors' performance on their tour. Besides, Katniss' heart really lies with Gale (Liam Hemsworth), whose strength, courage, and resilience are attributes she has yet to see in Peeta. Snow and head gamemaker Plutarch Heavensbee (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) concoct a plan that will rid Panem of Katniss Everdeen for good.

For the third Quarter Quell, a special edition of the Games that occurs every 25 years, Katniss and Peeta are placed back in the arena. Other victors like the bodacious and borderline sociopathic Johanna Mason (Jena Malone) and the slyly seductive Finnick Odair (Sam Claflin) are back in the game, while four career tributes from Districts 1 and 2 have also returned to compete again. In Katniss' eyes, the odds aren't exactly in her favor, but some surprising allies show up to help her and Peeta survive.

There were a lot of things that Catching Fire remarkably improved on in comparison to The Hunger Games. One step up was in the abilities of its field of actors. I was always a fan of Josh Hutcherson before, but my opinion sharply declined when I saw The Hunger Games. However, like his character, Hutcherson matured as an actor and was a far more effective Peeta than in the original. Elizabeth Banks, who plays Effie (they actually said her name in this movie!!), was able to make her character's change of heart as real to the audience as it was to Katniss and Peeta. Other actors returned and delivered their usually impressive work, including Jennifer Lawrence, Donald Sutherland and Woody Harrelson. When it comes to Master of Ceremonies Caesar Flickerman, all that can be said is that Tucci may just have been born for the role.

From the pool of new characters, Jena Malone was simply perfect as Johanna. While I was skeptical at first, hoping for the character to be played by Naya Rivera or Mila Kunis, I really can't imagine anyone else being as well fit for the part as Malone. Although his true accent arose a few times, Claflin was otherwise an appropriate choice for Finnick and did a good enough job bringing the fan favorite from the books to life.

There's also a much better story here than in The Hunger Games, with better character development and better writing. The trade-off? I didn't always feel the sense of excitement that I felt while watching The Hunger Games. There were certain scenes in that movie that thrill me every time I watch them - for example, the feast scene with Katniss vs. Clove. Since we never get a sense of rivalry between Katniss and these four all-star careers, and because the urgency of murdering children is no longer present, the arena scenes in Catching Fire aren't as intense, and the action is scarce.

Now it could be argued that the arena is not as central to the story in Catching Fire as they were in The Hunger Games, but aside from the cornucopia bloodbath (which was far better in this movie than in the original), there wasn't much intensity in the third Quarter Quell. Having said that, there were a fair amount of moving scenes. The acting by Lawrence, Hutcherson, and Harrelson was amazing during the scene when Snow announces that tributes will be reaped from the existing pool of victors. Also, the stop at District 11 on the Victory Tour was incredible with its combination of James Newton Howard's music and Jennifer Lawrence's raw emotion as she played Katniss in her moments of sadness over the loss of her friend Rue. 

Another complaint I have with this movie is one I shared with its own predecessor. Catching Fire was simply too short. And while the pacing was miles better in this movie than in the original, I still feel like it could've benefitted from an additional 5 or 10 minutes. But a stylistic edge to Catching Fire is that like Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Catching Fire is more mature than its prequel, as the characters now with a firmer grasp on what kind of an impact their actions can make. 

While not always as exciting or entertaining as The Hunger Games, Catching Fire stands out for being more mature and with better acting, storytelling and visuals. A disclaimer though: unless Francis Lawrence can make something worthwhile out of the mess that is Mockingjay, don't get your hopes too high for the sequel.

Rating: 4.5/5

Thor: The Dark World

http://www.showbiz411.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/thor-the-dark-world.jpg

When I saw the first Thor movie, I simply had one thought: meh. In a time when superhero movie are either phenomenal or a disappointment, Thor was just somewhere in between. When I saw the previews for Thor: The Dark World, I had high hopes and thought there would be more of an established plot and conflict. Much to my disappointment, Thor: The Dark World was a letdown. With no clear story or villain, there's nothing that Thor: The Dark World offers aside from some decent performances and a bit of comic relief.

Centuries before the events of the original Thor, a race of dark elves lose a crucial battle with the Asgardians. To take their vengeance, the elves wait for the Convergence, a time when all nine realms align, to make their move against Thor, his father Odin (Anthony Hopkins), and everyone else on the planet.

Following the events of The Avengers, Thor (Chris Hemsworth) has returned home to the otherworldly realm of Asgard, while his adoptive brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is imprisoned for his crimes against the human race. Back on Earth, Astrophysicist Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) is still searching for strange occurrences on her home planet, where her intern Darcy (Kat Dennings) stumbles upon a portal from Earth to Asgard. During her intergalactic travels, Jane is infected by the dark elves with an uncontrollable power source that begins overwhelming her.

The imminent battle between planets spans from Asgard to Earth to the Elves' home planet, putting countless lives in danger. Thor is forced to release his brother and work with him in their quest to combat the elves' attack.

Thor: The Dark World was trying its very best to convey a sense of fun, but wasn't successful in its attempt. In fact, it was actually quite boring most of the time. I never really cared about the caracters when they were in peril, because the script never gave them their necessary development.

While some moments of comic relief towards the end got me to laugh a few times, most of the time I found myself bored at the movie's attempts to be flashy and cool. Sorry to the filmmakers, but a showy appearance with attractive stars aren't enough to recommend a movie.

Hiddleston and Dennings had great screen presence, and managed to keep my eyes on the screen at the dullest of moments, but without them, the movie would have almost nothing worthwhile. Coming from the studio that delivered Iron Man and The Avengers, I don't think a step up from the average-quality Thor was so much to ask. Instead, it was a poorly constructed step down.

Rating: 2.5/5

12 Years a Slave

Courtesy of Slate

12 Years a Slave places the 21st century viewer back in the antebellum south. Solomon Northup, a married, free-born black man from New York, is approached by two white musicians who offer him a job in D.C. playing music, but at the opportune moment, drug him and sell him into slavery. Hundreds of miles from home and without his freedom papers, Solomon is renamed "Platt"and is sold to the Ford plantation.

Master Ford (Benedict Cumberbatch, ironically in one of his more personable roles) is extremely respectful to his slaves ("under the circumstances," as Solomon recognizes). He listens to Solomon's ideas on how to make transportation on the plantation more efficient. When it works, he rewards Solomon with a fiddle so that he can play music, and even shakes Solomon's hand when he thanks him.  One of the overseers, Master Tibeats (Paul Dano, Prisoners), isn't so keen to the idea of respecting slaves on the plantation and purposefully pushes Solomon to a breaking point. This leads to a physical confrontation between Solomon and Tibeats. Fearing for Solomon's safety, Ford sells Solomon to the Epps plantation, but hastily turns away when Solomon tries to tell him the truth about how he became a slave.

Both Epps (Michael Fassbender, Prometheus) and his wife (Sarah Paulson, Mud) are impatient and unsympathetic with their "legal property," and thus on the Epps farm, circumstances are exponentially worse. To avoid a whipping, slaves are expected to pick 200 pounds of cotton every single day. The one who gets the worst of it is Patsey (Lupita N'yong'o), who is unfortunately the center of the drunken Epps' lustful eyes, propelling resentment between the husband and wife.

Everywhere Solomon looks for help, he is entirely unsuccessful, until he meets Samuel Bass (Brad Pitt), an empathetic Canadian carpenter working for Epps. In Bass, Solomon might have finally found his way out of the decade-long hell he has been living.

12 Years a Slave is a moving, realistic and well-produced piece of historical cinema. And while I was almost fully impressed, I did notice a few issues. For example, I think that in actuality, the slaves would've been mistreated more. Don't get me wrong, the graphic scenes of suffering are enough to drop the jaw of the most hardened audience members, but 12 Years a Slave wasn't always as graphic a portrayal as I thought it would be. There were two scenes where Solomon attacked his overseer, both of which led to physical pain and embarrassment to his owners. In one of them, he was not punished at all, and in another, he was only slightly punished. Would he really have gotten off so easily?

Additionally, 12 Years a Slave just wasn't long enough. Clocking in at just a few minutes over two hours, the movie feels relatively brief, and never does a great job of definitively illustrating that Solomon's slavery was twelve years. Were it not for the title and epilogue, it really was anybody's guess how long he was held captive for. It's one of the few movies that would've benefitted from an extended runtime. Having said that, there was never a time where I felt the film lagged, and it managed to maintain at a consistent pace throughout, which both helped and hurt it at different times.

Ending the review with positives, much praise should go to the cast. It's true Chiwetel Ejiofor brings Solomon Northup back to life on the screen, but the cast as a whole was extremely exceptional from the major supporting roles (Fassbender, Paulson) to the more minuscule. Dano, Paulson, Paul Giamatti as the slave auctioneer, and Adepero Oduye as a slave separated from her children didn't dominate the screen, but alongside everyone in the cast, made a firmly lasting impression with their screentime. With its costume and set design, the setting was entirely believable.

12 Years a Slave has been cited as an early contender for Best Picture. While at this time I wouldn't give it the Oscar, I definitely see it as worthy of a nomination at the very least. It's a brave, bold cinematic achievement that throws the American audience back to one of its worst eras, and is well-crafted to the point that it will resonate for years to come.

Rating: 4.5/5

Ender's Game

http://cdn1.sbnation.com/entry_photo_images/8714077/
endergame_trailerscreencap_large_verge_medium_landscape.jpg

After watching the Star Wars movies as a kid, I always thought it would be so cool to fight in an alien war and save the world. Ender's Game illustrates that in actuality, it wouldn't be so cool. Decades after the initial invasion of the Formics alien army, the genius warrior-strategist Ender Wiggin (Asa Butterfield) is sent to battle school. There, he and dozens of other kids and teens are trained from an early age to be the force of resistance should another wave of Formics attack.

Battle school proves no easy task for Ender. Colonel Graff (Harrison Ford) blocks his e-mail, Sergeant Dap limits his words only to "legitimate questions," and fellow students Bonzo and Bernard are attempt to hinder Ender's successes. Though socially out of place, Ender proves to be fit for whatever task he is assigned to, outsmarting all of his colleagues and higher-ranking officers and skillfully beating the school's other teams in a strategic mock-battle game.

Ender's wisdom and instincts see him promoted just as the Formics are about to return to Earth. Ender is is given a team to train with during a final string of simulations before being sent out to stop the Formics forever.

Ender's Game was, in my eyes, a bell curve of a movie. The beginning was shaky, to say the least, but things really picked towards the middle, and as time progressed, I became more and more immersed in Ender's story. As the ending neared, it wasn't as entertaining, and the way writer-director Gavin Hood went about the ending was weak and abrupt.

For the better part of the movie, Ender's Game had a highly entertaining atmosphere, and the movie was a lot of fun. There was amazing acting from its pool of Oscar nominees (see Ford, Hailee Steinfeld,  Abigail Breslin and Ben Kingsley), and from the child actors. Asa Butterfield has such an undeniable talent, while the kids who become Ender's friends (Steinfeld, Aramis Knight, Suraj Parthasarathy) light up the screen. The not-so-good acting came from Viola Davis, who was very stale in the delivery of her lines and whose character seemed totally unnecessary.

Throughout Ender's Game, I wasn't sure if it'd be a 4 or a 4.5 out of 5. It kept wavering back and forth, as it was very good most of the time. The reason it got a 4 was because in my eyes, a sci-fi movie needs to be truly amazing to grab a 5 or a 4.5, and at its weakest moments, Ender's Game wasn't there. If there was any doubt by the last scene, the ending solidified a 4.

Rating: 4/5

About Time

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18vlr80cn52smjpg/original.jpg

An original idea can only carry a movie so far. Richard Curtis, writer and director of About Time, proved that he understands this cinematic rule of thumb. And so instead of milking his concept of a man who can travel through time for two whole hours, he effectively manages to blend his idea with the usual elements of the romantic dramedy, and the results are highly impressive. 

When Tim (Domhnall Gleeson) turns 21, he is told by his father (Bill Nighy, Pirates of the Caribbean) that the men of their family can travel backwards in time. Like all of us would, Tim doesn't believe his father until he tries it out for himself. Tim's father tells him he shouldn't use his powers to become filthy rich or get out of working a day job, but to focus on the things that would make his life the best it can possibly be.

What would any man do first when he finds out he can travel in time? Get the girl. Although he strikes out with his first attempt, he meets the love of his life, Mary (Rachel McAdams, Mean Girls), on a blind date. Later that night, he goes back in time to help another friend, and when he returns, he finds himself erased from Mary's memory, as they had never gone out. Tim ends up going back in time while being back in time over and over again to secure his relationship with Mary. While interesting in concept, these scenes became too layered and complex and slightly lost the comedy and charm along the way. 

This was a similar problem with Curtis' previous work, Love Actually. But here, these slower and arguably unnecessary scenes took place earlier rather than later, and so the during the second half, when Tim and Mary find themselves enter into committed relationship, and eventually marriage, things quickly pick back up. 

Normally, it'd be hard to believe these two actors would have chemistry, but they're able to exude such sweetness in their performances, and we fall in love with them as soon as they do with each other. Domhnall Gleeson, who hasn't done much mainstream work aside from very small roles in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and Never Let Me Go, shows charismatic professionalism in his first major film role. And as always, Rachel McAdams knocks it out of the park and is absolutely delightful in her performance as Mary. As Tim's father, Bill Nighy gives a sincere performance and proves he does some of his best acting in the works of Richard Curtis.

The dialogue was amazing, to say the least. Hilarious and serious at the perfect moments, the characters in About Time knew had the best things to say, and it was all the better coming from its main actors. The dialogue made up for the occasionally weak moments in the story, and although we might not always be fully captivated by what's going on in the movie, we always care about the characters and are lost in the words that they say. 

About Time is adorable. It takes a while to become great, but overall, it's lovable, the actors were perfect, and the dialogue was flawless. With only one or two scenes that ran the time travel concept for too long, About Time was able to maintain originality while still having a comfortable and familiar feel of other movies of its genre.

Rating: 4/5

Bad Grandpa

http://bigfanboy.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/
Jackass-Presents-Bad-Grandpa-Image-003.jpg

Okay, to people who read my blog regularly, it may seem that I’m going to contradict myself here. But stay tuned.

Anyone who read my review of The Hangover: Part III may remember how I called out the first two for being too reliant on slapstick and having an average screenplay and thus never resonating to me as the comedy classics their fans saw them as. Well, now it’s five months after The Hangover: Part III, and Bad Grandpa is in theaters. You could make the argument that Bad Grandpa is a 90-minute-long slapstick-fest. Well you’d be wrong.

While the physical gags that made the whole theater roar with laughter all resulted from slapstick, what differs this Jackass production from others of its kind is one crucial factor: there is a screenplay here, ingeniously intertwined with candid-camera pranks that further the plot.

Johnny Knoxville heads the cast of four main characters with a surprisingly brilliant portrayal of 86-year-old Irving Zisman. After his daughter is sent to jail, he oversees his grandson Billy (Jackson Nicoll) on a trip across the country to deliver the boy to his father. Along the way, we see typical Jackass stunts that, instead of putting the protagonists in danger of serious bodily harm, make us laugh with the reactions of the inexplicably involved passersby. These include, but are not limited to, Irving trying out his skills at a male strip club, Billy going up to strangers on the street asking to be adopted, and Irving entering Billy into a beauty pageant (what happens in this scene is probably the funniest part of the movie, and so I wish they hadn’t given it away in the trailer).

Clear to anyone who watches the movie, Bad Grandpa isn’t groundbreaking in its storytelling or revolutionary in its comedy. In 10 years, no one will be buzzing about it. But Bad Grandpa is a perfect one-time-viewing movie. After one time, I feel the laughs will be scarce, but in no way am I encouraging you to skip this movie. There’s a real feel due to its use of regular people, and I was intrigued throughout, because the setup of combined scripted and unscripted content never got boring and always kept things fresh. The movie offers something you can’t see anywhere else besides a Jackass production: R-rated, vulgar candid pranks, and a clever blend of real and fictitious content.

So, the reason I hype this movie is the same reason I gave The Hangover: Part III a good review. There’s a smart script here, and it’s the script that brings about the reactions and of the unwilling participants of the movie. I also feel it is necessary to reiterate how impressive of a performance Johnny Knoxville delivers. He never breaks character and is fully convincing in his performance of the world’s worst Grandpa. Jackson Nicoll is also commendable. While it’s evident by his glowing face that he’s enjoying every second of making this movie, he also fails to break character once.

Bad Grandpa doesn’t need to be seen on the big screen, but if you ever need a wholesome laugh, I’d tell you that it does need to be seen. As much as some might say this isn’t their kind of movie, I can’t think of anyone who wouldn’t laugh at least once or twice during Bad Grandpa. So like I said, no contradictions here. Just a witty screenplay like nothing you’ve ever seen, and although it’s not flawless, Bad Grandpa is a raunchily fun ride.

Rating: 3.5/5