AJ's Top 10 of 2013

Another Hollywood year is now complete. Granted, some movies that have been "technically" released in 2013 haven't seen a wide release, and so I won't be considering them for my Best of the Year list. These include, but are not limited to; August: Osage County, Her, Labor Day and Lone Survivor. Having gotten that out of the way, I saw 46 theatrically released films this year, and here are my 10 favorite.

10. The Wolf of Wall Street

CinemaBlend

It runs close to 3 hours, but Terrence Winter's screenplay and Leonardo Dicaprio's performance keep your eyes glued and your attention span directed to the screen, where the crime movie of the year is delivered in the most hilarious way.

9. Epic

Wikipedia

The scope of events in Epic is enormous, but the film never loses its focus, its heart, or its fun, and as a result, Epic is the best animated film of the year (yes, to everyone asking yourself right now, I did see Frozen).

8. Blue Jasmine

Wikipedia

Cate Blanchett lights up the screen in her portrayal of Jasmine. We can't help but enjoy every minute of the movie that forces us to look at our materialistic and individualistic behaviors and the way they affect us.

7. The Way Way Back

Wikipedia

Even though the characters don't always stand out as well as they do in Juno or Up in the Air, The Way Way Back is a fun summer indie that features great performances from Liam James, Allison Janney, AnnaSophia Robb and Sam Rockwell.

6. Kick-Ass 2

MoviePoster.com

Most of the times I disagreed with mainstream critics this year is when I gave bad reviews to critically acclaimed films. Here, I gave a good review for a film that wasn't as well received. But I don't care, because I can say with absolute certainty that Kick-Ass 2 is a good movie. Hilarious, action-packed, and with a great screenplay, Kick-Ass 2 is one heck of a good time.

5. Don Jon

Wikipedia

It's not perfect, but Don Jon is still the best comedy of the year and offers amazing potential for the future career of Joseph Gordon-Levitt.

4. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

Hollywood Reporter

Story-wise, acting-wise, and in respect to its technical construction, it's a huge improvement on its predecessor. It's not always as exciting, but to be fair, most of the excitement takes place outside of the arena in this sequel.

3. 12 Years a Slave

Wikipedia

I wanted more honesty, more brutality, and a more distinct time layout. Without it, I still saw an awe-invoking tale of survival and humanity.

2. Gravity

Wikipedia

It might be safe to say that sci-fi and special effects have reached a new cinematic landmark. Also, add Sandra Bullock to the list of great lead female sci-fi performances, alongside Sigourney Weaver in Aliens, Noomi Rapace in Prometheus, and Linda Hamilton in Terminator 2.

1. Mud

enprimerafila

Tye Sheridan is a revelation as Ellis, and Matthew McConaughey proves that 2013 is his year for movies. Mud isn't just the best movie of the year, it's a showcase of mesmerizing acting, writing, directing, music, and cinematography, and is a simple yet powerful reminder that originality in filmmaking is still possible. Movies like Mud are the gems that true movie lovers seek to appreciate.

The Wolf of Wall Street

Wordpress

I'll try to make this review shorter than the nearly 3-hour long Wolf of Wall Street. But, like the movie, regardless of length, I hope it will be worth your time. The movie is based on the true story of New York stockbroker Jordan Belfort. After the 1987 stock market crash, fresh-out-of-college Jordan (Leonardo DiCaprio) takes a job selling penny stocks. His prior experience on Wall Street earns him enormous profits. When he concludes that enough is never enough, he opens up his own firm with his neighbor Donnie (Jonah Hill).

The movie illustrates the idea that some roller coasters in life are ones you can't get off of so easily. Once Jordan's firm, which he names Stratton Oakmont, earns billions in revenue, the company expands, and Jordan's behaviors become rather racy. He begins using drugs and sleeping with prostitutes several times a day and divorces his good-natured wife to marry a model.

As expected, following years of being on top, The Man comes to bring Jordan down. In The Wolf of Wall Street, "The Man" is FBI Agent Patrick Denham. Jordan starts moving money around internationally, and when prompted to leave the company with what he's already made, he tells his employees that nothing will ever take him away from Stratton Oakmont. That is, except for corruption and ignorance.

DiCaprio delivers his usual effortless on-screen brilliance in this film, especially in the scenes that require most of him. Whether he's throwing himself down a flight of stairs and crawling into his car under the influence of aged drugs, telling colleagues to sell him a pen, giving the best motivational speeches I've ever seen on film, or punching his wife in the stomach, he, like Terence Winter's screenplay, is totally immersive. The movie is very long, and so naturally it slows down at points. However, thanks to DiCaprio, it never gets boring.

That doesn't mean I wouldn't cut some scenes from the movie. As time went by, I pinpointed a few scenes and made mental notes of which ones Scorsese could've cut without hearing much ruckus from the audience. One negative attribute was that with some of these unnecessary scenes, the extraordinary comedic setup was partially let down during its second half. I also wanted to see more from both of Jordan's wives and from his first boss (Matthew McConaughey), who gave Jordan tips on how hookers, coke, and whacking off are what keep all great stockbrokers sane. I have a feeling the character had a lot more to offer, and seeing him for only two scenes was a disappointment. Aside from DiCaprio and McConaughey, the rest of the cast excelled as well. Jonah Hill, Jon Bernthal, Jean Dujardin, and Kyle Chandler all surprised me with noteworthy performances unlike any other they had given in their careers.

The Wolf of Wall Street sells one of the year's best ensemble casts, screenplays and comedies. In short, it's one of the best of 2013, and although it could've been better, I'm happy with what Scorsese gave us.

Rating: 4.5/5

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

123phim

I don't think I'm alone when I say The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey was a letdown. With too many characters, pointless conversations, scenes of unnecessary exposition, and a gruesomely long runtime, An Unexpected Journey didn't exactly have many LOTR fans jumping for joy at the thought of a second entry. Rest assure, The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug is a huge improvement on the first installment of the Hobbit trilogy, with a clear layout of characters, more action, more excitement, and more reasons to recommend it.

Following a near deadly confrontation with Azog, an Orc who is trying to end the Dwarven line of Durin, the company of Dwarves, plus the hobbit Bilbo and the Wizard Gandalf, continue their quest to reclaim the Lonely Mountain and kill the gargantuan dragon Smaug. In this middle part of the story, Bilbo and the dwarves are separated from Gandalf, and must face off against giant spiders, elves, orc armies, bitter townspeople of Laketown, and of course, Smaug.

Some of the new characters include the elf Tauriel (Kate Austen...I mean Evangeline Lilly) and Legolas (Orlando Bloom), who reprises his role from the original Lord of the Rings trilogy. Their story becomes intertwined with that of the dwarves, and the romance between Tauriel and Kili the dwarf was well thought out and even better executed on the big screen. Bard the Bowman, who helps smuggle the dwarves into Laketown, provided more conflict for the story and was brought to life respectably by Luke Evans. However, the new character that is impossible to not mention is Smaug. His menacing presence was everything I had hoped it would be. His design was ferocious, his mannerisms were diabolical, and his voice work by Benedict Cumberbatch was astounding. His role in the next installment promises to be even better, or so I would hope.

As I stated earlier, The Desolation of Smaug is a step-up from its predecessor in many ways. The cinematography was clearer and scenes were lit better. Characters were better established, comic relief was more effective, and the special effects here made the ones used in An Unexpected Journey look even worse than they already did. Though while it's still a better movie than its prequel, The Desolation of Smaug still had a few flaws of its own. For instance, the movie was still too long, especially since some scenes in the first hour or so weren't essential to the story. Having said that, this movie jumps into the good stuff a lot faster than in the first movie. Also, even though there was a better range of characters and stories, we still don't get to know all of the dwares as individuals and that's a huge hinderance when you're trying to root for them. Additionally, Azog didn't play as big a role in this movie, and that wouldn't be a problem if some of us hadn't forgotten why he was chasing after the dwarves in the first place. Finally, the ending was a bit too abrupt for my liking.

If you gave up hope on the remainder of this franchise after the first, fear not. Most of the adventure, fun, and action of Middle Earth is back with The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smuag. And no, it's not as good as the original trilogy, but it's a great movie, and a much better one than An Unexpected Journey.

Rating: 4/5

Inside Llewen Davis

Inside Llewen Davis began with a solid start. There was fresh comedy, attention-grabbing songs, and top-notch performances from Oscar Isaac, Carey Mulligan, and Justin Timberlake. After a while though, it seems like the Coen Brothers must've run out of ideas, because about 40 minutes in, the film took a total turn for the worse, and everything I was enjoying about it went away. I guess it's another one of 2013's cinematic letdowns.

Folk singer Llewen Davis (Oscar Isaac) is struggling to get noticed after his partner commits suicide. He's shown to have little motivation, and if anyone were to ask him "How bad do you want this?" he probably wouldn't give a convincing answer. He plays small gigs to make enough to get by and stays on the couches of associates, acquaintances, and even people he's just met due to his lack of a dwelling place. He oftentimes finds himself residing with his fellow folk-singer friends Jim and Jean (Justin Timberlake and Carey Mulligan) or the apartment of an older college professor and his wife.

Llewen starts collaborating with Jim to produce a record he's sure will be a hit, while his most recent album, entitled "Inside Llewen Davis," is having a hard time being sold. Meanwhile, he overstays his welcome at the professor's apartment, and because Jean has lost all respect for Llewen, he hitches a ride to Chicago to try and sell his record again. I was enjoying every minute of Inside Llewen Davis until the decision was made to bring Llewen outside of New York and temporarily replace Mulligan (who was probably the best part about the movie) and Timberlake with John Goodman and Garret Hedlund.

Once the pair of musicians played by Hedlund and Goodman pick up Llewen on their way to Chicago, the movie became extremely (and I know I've used this word a lot this year) boring. After 40 minutes of magnificent character establishment, near-perfect comedic dialogue, and songs that I'm planning on buying on iTunes, we're placed in a car with two characters we know nothing about and who haven't been properly introduced. The remainder of the movie is mostly devoid of laughs and memorable scenes, and it truly puzzles me how and why the Coen Brothers would set up such a perfect situation for a week in the life of Llewen Davis and then let it come crashing down on itself. I would've been all for recommending this movie had there been more Carey Mulligan, more music, and less melodrama.

The fact that movies like this, Dallas Buyers Club and Nebraska are being considered two of the year's best is telling me just one thing - 2013 was a pretty damn weak year for movies. I'll go ahead and give this movie a positive score, but I think you'll thank me if you walk out of the theater right after you hear the line "Where's his scrotum?"

Rating: 3/5

American Hustle

Business Insider

It was a little over a year ago when writer-director David O. Russell released Silver Linings Playbook. I gave it a 4/5, mainly for the performances of Jennifer Lawrence and Bradley Cooper. Looking back, I probably should've scored it with a 3.5/5, especially since I'd give Russell's newest movie, American Hustle, a 4/5 as well. American Hustle matches Russell's previous work in the field of acting but is an improvement in pacing, comedy and drama.

Christian Bale stars as conman Irving Rosenfeld, who partners up with Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams) to start up a new operation. Irving has Sydney bring him her rich friends, where he offers to invest their money. The two embezzle the cash and pocket the profit. As their funds increase, so does their mutual attraction, which complicates the already tumultuous marriage between Irving and his carelessly unstable wife Rosalyn (Jennifer Lawrence). 

After initial success, Irving and Sydney are busted by FBI agent Richie DiMaso (Bradley Cooper). DiMaso makes a deal with the two to release them if they help him catch four other con artists. Irving accepts, and he, Sydney, and Richie work to bring down the mayor of Camden, NJ for taking a bribe. As Irving takes Rosalyn on dinner dates with Mayor Polito (Jeremy Renner) and his wife, Irving forms a legitimate friendship with Polito and starts to feel remorseful about his role in the takedown of a person who he sees as a great man. Meanwhile, Sydney, still under the guise of her alias as the British Edith Greensley, is welcoming the advances of Richie following a spat with Irving. 

The movie has a lot of key ingredients for a Grade-A movie: an all-star cast, brilliant performances, great comic relief, twists and surprises, commendable cinematography, and set pieces, costumes and hairstyling that places you in the timeframe of the story. But American Hustle is missing something - focus. The movie focuses more on the characters and sometimes forgets to touch base with the audience about what those characters are up to and what their true intentions are. 

Still, despite the imperfections in the screenplay, the cast carries the movie well enough on their own. Christian Bale provides an enjoyable comedic presence as Irving. It's not a career-best, but it's still praiseworthy. Amy Adams is simply fantastic in her best performance since The Fighter, and I sincerely hope she gets her 5th Oscar nomination for her efforts. And as expected, Jennifer Lawrence steals every scene she's in, and her performance in American Hustle proves that she undoubtedly is one of the best actresses of this generation. 

You should expect to see the cast on stage at the SAG Awards in a few weeks, as it'll be a shock if they don't take home the prize for Best Acting Ensemble. But when it comes to Best Picture or Best Screenplay at the Oscars, I think David O. Russell might walk away empty handed for the second year in a row. He makes movies that I deeply want to love, although he always lets me down just a bit. He's a good filmmaker, and I know he can be great. David O. Russell isn't quite there just yet, but i have faith that one day he will be.

Rating: 4/5

Philomena

http://common.cinemachicago.org/resources/images/49FilmStills/Philomena-W.jpg

Philomena is a delightful film that leaves powerfully sweet impact. Based on the true story of Philomena Lee (played by Judi Dench), an Irish woman whose illegitimate son was given up for adoption during her teenage years, the movie recounts her efforts to relocate him 50 years later. With the help of a down-on-his-luck journalist (Steve Coogan, who also co-produced and co-worte the film) looking for his comeback, Philomena begins to see real hope of reuniting with her son Michael.

The journalist, Martin, concludes that Anthony was probably adopted by an American couple and takes Philomena to the States so she can demand answers on his whereabouts. When the two are in America, there's a huge revelation about Anthony and his life every five minutes or so, and you won't believe some of the things about Anthony and the life he lived. The story moves with the pacing and immediacy of a classic mystery film, but instead of a murderer or kidnapper, you're hoping to find reason, for Philomena's sake.

For her age-defying portrayal of Philomena, Judi Dench deserves an Oscar. The veteran actress will most likely be going up against Sandra Bullock in Gravity, Amy Adams in American Hustle, and Cate Blanchett in Blue Jasmine for the gold, and while all of these ladies gave fantastic performances, I think that with Philomena, Judi Dench gives the best female performance of the year. She carries all of the emotion of the Philomena and her horrifying adolescent years, but also conveys the "sweet old lady" persona rather nicely. I'm hoping the Academy sees in Dench what I did, and if they do, the Best Actress Oscar should be an easy decision this year.

In one of the film's final scenes, Philomena and Martin lash out at the nuns who wronged her when they gave away her son. Martin behaves one way, while Philomena deals with them with a different approach. I found myself rooting for Martin at first, but when I saw how Philomena reacted, I asked myself how I would react in that situation. That's the power Philomena had. Sure, it was entertaining, and constantly surprising, but it also forced me to look at myself to answer the questions the film poses. Would I have the willpower to look for somebody every day for 50 years? Is it possible to love and accept, no questions asked? Most importantly, could I forgive as Philomena did?

With so many unexpected plot twists, you'll have a hard time believing Philomena is based on a true story. It's interesting to watch it with the knowledge that Philomena depicts a real story because it adds even more of a punch to the "no way!" feeling you get whenever another revelation is made. Philomena Lee's story is indescribably life-affirming, and needs to be seen to be believed.

Rating: 4.5/5

Nebraska

http://www.ashvegas.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/nebraska-2.jpg

It's movies like Nebraska that really make me want to become a professional movie critic, because even if I can stray just one person away from a movie like this, I'll feel like I have done my job. When I look at how well this film has done, I see a Rotten Tomatoes score of 92%, and a label of "Certified Fresh." I see a Metaritic score of 86, indicating "Universal Acclaim." I also see it received 5 Golden Globe nominations, including Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Screenplay. To anybody who enjoyed this movie, I have two questions for you - how and why?

This 2013 Cannes Film Festival entry follows David Grant (Will Forte) as he brings his aloof and alcoholic father Woody to Nebraska, where the old man is convinced he won a $1 million grand prize. David knows it's a scam, but to give his mother (June Squibb) a break and to spend some quality time with his dad, he agrees to drive him to the sweepstakes headquarters to make his father happy.

Along the way, Woody hits his head after drinking one night and is advised to stay put for a few days and rest. David drives over to his aunt's house, where his mother and brother join him for a family reunion with his cousins and uncles and aunts. Already sounds like a movie worth seeing, huh? Well if I haven't made this movie sound boring enough, it really only gets worse. Rather than recap the rest of the synopsis, let's just sum it up by saying that Woody encounters a few old faces is in his hometown and embarrasses himself and his family when everyone that thinks he has actually won a million dollars finds out it was a sham.

There were three scenes I enjoyed in this movie. That's right - three. One is when David is talking to his cousins about how long it takes to drive certain distances, another is when David's mother cusses out a few family members, and the last is when David and his brother steal a compressor. In a 110 minute movie, that only adds up to about 5 minutes of enjoyable screentime. Other Alexander Payne movies like The Descendants and Sideways had a lot more than that. If it weren't for June Squibb's performance, I might've left the theater.

Nebraska was a total waste of time and money, and the only Oscar nominations I could conceivably see it being worthy of are Best Actor for Bruce Dern and Best Supporting Actress for June Squibb. Will Forte has been recognized by some critics circles, though I have no idea why. He seemed to read his lines off just to get his paycheck. Best Screenplay? What for? For one of the most awkwardly paced and unessential works of cinema this year? And Best Director? Well, let's just say that I've seen a lot better from Alexander Payne and was thoroughly disappointed.

Nebraska is as boring and desolate as the State that it takes place in probably is. Still, Squibb made me laugh, and Dern's dedication to his role deserves acknowledgement. But that's all I can commend here.

Rating: 2/5

The Book Thief

http://img2-1.timeinc.net/ew/i/2013/11/05/The-Book-Thief-Review.jpg

The first film I saw that dealt with World War II through the eyes of a child was 2008's The Boy in the Striped Pajamas. While The Book Thief is commendable for its efforts, I'd definitely give the edge to The Boy in the Striped Pajamas. Why? A better lead performer, a stronger ending, and a story more worthy of telling. But don't get me wrong - up until the end, The Book Thief is an intriguing motion picture about innocence in a time of fear, friendship in a time of war, and hope in a time of bleakness.

In 1938 Germany, Liesel is sent by her mother to live with a different family. Her new parents are Hans and Elsa Hubermann, and while Elsa is initially strict, demanding, and cold to her adoptive daughter, Hans is eager to welcome the child into his home. In the same neighborhood as Liesel is Rudy, an amiable youngster who befriends the shy Liesel. Over the years, Liesel becomes more comfortable in her new home, learns to love and respect the Hubbermann's, and becomes inseparable with Rudy. But as books burn and Jewish-owned businesses become scarce, Liesel becomes nervous with what is becoming of Germany.

One night, Hans and Elsa find themselves housing a fugitive Jew named Max, the son of a man who saved Hans' life in World War I. While Max's presence doesn't make life easy for the couple, he and Liesel become instant friends. Liesel later finds solace in the house of the Bürgermeister, where his wife welcomes Liesel to come over and read with her anytime in their elaborate library. When her husband discovers this, Liesel is told to leave and never return, causing her to sneak into their house to borrow books so she can continue to read.

The Book Thief is a good movie - there's no doubt, but it's a tad slow-paced at times, leaves questions unanswered and doesn't always use its strengths. For example, Nico Liersch shines as Rudy, stealing every scene from Sophie Nélissee in her lead performance as Liesel when they're on the screen together, but he's not in the movie as much as you'll want him to be. The same goes for Max - even though the character is crucial to the story, he takes the back seat for most of the film. Also, what's the story with the Bürgermeister's wife?

The disappointments were minimal, but still left a major impact on my feelings toward the film. I have two main criticisms. The first is the casting of Sophie Nélissee as Liesel. In my eyes, her performance never amounts to anything spectacular, especially in comparison to The Boy in the Striped Pajamas. The lead in that movie went on to star in Ender's Game and Martin Scorcese's Hugo, because people saw talent in the young Asa Butterfield. Nothing about the young Sophie drags your eyes to her, unfortunately. The second criticism goes to the ending. Without giving away their identities, I will say that many characters die in the end. But the ones who do die and the circumstances of their deaths leave you asking many questions. Why? What purpose does their death serve? What message is it sending? What does it all mean?

Granted, World War II has been studied and converted into historical fiction for decades, and whenever a new perspective of the time comes along, most people find it worthy of exploring unless it's really bad. With its costume and set design, impressive performances from the supporting cast, and immersive breadth of ideas explored, The Book Thief is worth a watch. Having said that, make sure you check out The Boy in the Striped Pajamas first.

Rating: 3.5/5

Dallas Buyers Club

http://a.abcnews.com/

Dallas Buyers Club isn't selling much aside from some golden performances. The biopic about Texas-druggie Ron Woodruff (portrayed by Matthew McConaughey) started off strong, setting up the universe of the homophobic and morally loose Southerner very well. We worry about Ron's longevity when he is diagnosed with AIDS and given 30 days to live. We are intrigued when we meet the transgendered Rayon (Jared Leto), and are interested to see what more the character will bring to the story. Unfortunately for Mr. McConaughey and Mr. Leto, the screenplay eventually lets them down, and the lack of dedicated direction causes the movie to sail into the terrifying waters of boredom.

The story starts in 1985, where we see a picture of Ron's life. He's the stereotypical deep-south native, sleeping with any girl he meets, spending most of his free time in bars, and putting almost everything in his body. He soon becomes sick to the point of passing out, waking up in the hospital where two doctors tell him of his infection. Ron reacts by storming out and proclaiming he's "not a queer."

Realizing his disease is killing him from the inside, Ron goes back to the hospital to get medicine, where he meets Rayon, an AIDS-infected patient. When Ron starts to feel even worse from the dugs given to him, he partners up with Rayon and begins to smuggle in drugs from Mexico that haven't been approved by the FDA. After Ron secures his own health, outliving the doctor's prediction of 30 days by several years, he sells the drugs to other AIDS patients in the area, charing $400 a month for unlimited medicine in his "Dallas Buyers Club."

Matther McConaughey and Jared Leto are being showered with awards and nominations by critics and associations alike, and they are very much deserved. Both went through immense physical changes to get into the frame of their characters and are immensely successful in their performances. However, if it weren't for the two male leads, there would be nothing impressive or noteworthy about this movie aside from the scenes that depict the corruption of the FDA, and to be honest, I've seen government corruption done better in a lot of other movies.

After the first 20 minutes or so of the Club's introduction, scenes become repetitive, and I honestly wondered why the movie was still going. For the story that it told, Dallas Buyers Club was too long. They might have been able to get away with the length had the screenplay been more clever with its content (showing more scenes of Ron's battle with the FDA, more on Rayon, etc.).

This movie isn't garbage, but it's a shame the first 40 minutes or so lead me to think there was a lot more good stuff coming my way. If it weren't for McConaughey and Leto totally immersing themselves into their roles, there wouldn't be anything worthwhile about Dallas Buyers Club.

Rating: 2.5/5

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