Transformers: Age of Extinction (2014)

Michael Bay has made a fourth Transformers movie unfortunately. Anyone who has watched my videos of my problems with the Transformers films, knows how much I want to see Transformers rebooted and finally become something more than something for Bay to ruin or Hasbro to use only to sell toys. And how does this film turn out? Let's find out on my 550th review, Transformers: Age of Extinction.

Plot: It's been four years since the events of the third movie, and since then, the U.S. government has marde the Autobots fugitives and have been hunting them down with the help of a Transformer bounty hunter named Lockdown. But shortly after Optimus Prime is found and rebooted by a failed inventor named Cade Yeager, he rounds up the remaining Autobots and is off to stop Lockdown while also stopping a business tycoon Joshua Joyce from creating his own Transformers, including one named Galvatron.

So did this film deliver in being another Bay film where everything that's good about the Transformers franchise - namely characters, lore and so on are poorly used, had explosions everywhere, too much focus on the humans, dumb comedy, and had a plain terrible script to top it all off? Oh yeah! While it may not have Revenge of the Fallen's so-called comedy with things like Wheelie humping Mikaela's leg or Devestator's nuts showing and things like that, Age of Extinction regardless is the worst out of the films with having too many story lines, remarkably terrible dialogue - even for Michael Bay arguably - and probably caring for the Transformers lore and being loyal to the characters even less than practically the first three films put together. Ultimately, there's an article I read before going to see the movie where Bay basically stated how he truly doesn't give a rats whether or not people will hate the movie, and it shows. It truly, deeply shows. The plot was so all over the place that I would argue that the first three films (yes, even Revenge of the Fallen and Dark of the Moon) had something of a flowing narrative compared to this movie. Most of the story lines had interesting ideas, but where way too many to properly use any of them or even have any real screen time. People who thought The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was a mess can stop their whining and complaining after seeing this movie. I mean first we have Mark Wahlberg's character and his family trying to save their farm, then we have the Autobots being on the run because they're blamed for what happened in Chicago, then we have Lockdown trying to capture Optimus Prime, then we have Joyce trying to create with his own Transformers with this mineral called Transfornium, which leads to this whole thing about creating Galvatron and what he tries to do, and then (you see where I'm going at with this?) you have the government guys who are trying to kill the Autobots try to get some Cybertronian relic called a Seed, and then finally somewhere into all of that, we get the Dinobots...sort of. Oh! And did I forget to mention that somehow along with all of that, there's suppose to be this storyline of how we have the "creators" of the Transformers to worry about even though the past three movies stated that they were just created by the Allspark? See, even when I saw Revenge of the Fallen and Dark of the Moon for the first time, I was invested in the movies well enough to wonder what was going to happen and I wasn't getting impatient to find out. But with this movie, I think somewhere halfway through the movie I started wanting them to wrap things up and eventually became more and more eager for them to just finish it and started to get irritated. That almost never happens to me when I'm watching a big movie like this for the first time. That's...not a good sign to say the least. And of coarse, there almost nothing done right with the actual characters. Hound just had this commando kind of personality where he has all these big guns and acts like he's smoking a cigar, then you have Brains somehow still alive despite dying in the last movie, and then you have Crosshairs who... is just completely pessimistic throughout the majority of the film. Though what somewhat stroke a nerve for me personally when it came to the Autobots was the misuse of Drift. Now granted, he probably has the least focus among the Autobots next to Brains, but Drift is one of my all time favorite Transformers because of how he's probably one of the most complex and interesting characters of the franchise in recent years, and yet just because he uses swords in the comics, they have him become this complete Samurai stereotype while being voiced by Ken Watanabe who is not a stereotypical Japanese actor, but Micahel Bay used him to that effect anyway. Thankfully from knowing all this in advance, I didn't get pissed off watching the movie like I somewhat thought I would... but they still used one of my favorite characters to just be a mechanical version of something from one of our history books, so naturally I am really, really, really REALLY am not okay with that. Bumblebee was kinda downplayed too. He had some moments, but he basically had almost the exact opposite amount of focus has he did in the other films. As for Optimus? *sigh* He had some decent lines, and it's always a pleasure to hear Peter Cullen do his voice even in these films somewhat, but regardless, what we got was...really a messed up, sloppy shadow of the lovable Optimus Prime at the end of the day. The Dinobots were not in the movie for very long, and they had no personalities or any real development to the point where despite how fun it is to see them in action, we still don't really get the real Dinobots that fans know and love. Galvatron would've been a nice addition to the story, but he really had only three or four very brief scenes, and had only 4-5 ish lines in the entire movie, so he was generally pointless. And the human characters where just plain hallow. While no one was as bad as Judy Witwicky or the roommate from the second film or anything like that, they where just really uninteresting. The only ones that were close to that were Cade Yeager and Joshua Joyce just because it's Mark Wahlberg and Stanley Tucci, and even that doesn't hold a lot of water. Other than that, there was barely anything really special with the action even with the Dinobots and some of the designs for things like the robots in Lockdown's ship where really embarrassing. Now before I wrap up this fairly long review, let me quickly talk about what's good about what's good with the film, cause there where some things I kinda liked. Firstly, there's Lockdown. While his development as a character was strangely all over the place, I still kind of found him to probably be the most interesting part of the entire movie. How he's neither Autobot or Decepticon and has this bounty hunter army (or something) and there's this mystery about who sent him to earth. Plus, he can transform his face into a giant assault rifle (I've heard it called a cannon, but it has more of an assault rifle look), which was a very clever idea. And when it came to the final battle, the Autobots (specifically anyone who isn't Optimus or Bumblebee) did more of fighting and killing the Decepticons without any help from any military at all. That is actually a major improvement from the first three films. And the use of showing of the bodies of the women was downplayed. I think the worst that happened where two points where the camera focused on a woman wearing short shorts. It's still using them as eye candy, but let's face it; having Bay focus more on women's legs than their chest or butt? As far as giving us less of the putting-women-in-the-movies-just-to-be-eye-candy cliche, that's almost a mature big boy step for the guy.

And that's my review for Transformers: Age of Extinction. I liked Lockdown for what they had for him, and there were some minor improvements compared to the other three films, but that aside, what we have here is Michael Bay giving The Transformers even more shame with less interesting action, more misuse of the Transformers as characters, too much focus on hollow and uninteresting human characters, and a terrible script that gave us way too many things with not enough time to give us time to really understand them, making the film a major, crowded mess. It doesn't have the terrible stuff from Revenge of the Fallen like The Twins, Wheelie humping Mikaela's leg, Devestator's nuts and so on, but somehow this movie still makes itself out as the worst thing that could ever have been created in the entire franchise.

Rating: 10%

Shaun of the Dead (2004)

Well my friend Blaine let me borrow his copies of Paul and The World's End, and so I planned to use this oppertunity to go through the entire Three Flavous Cornetto trilogy. That was a few months ago, and I've been busy and more or less forgot that I even had the films in my possession. But he recently reminded me that I had Paul and The World's End, so I quickly went through the trilogy and Paul before I hung out with him next and returned those movies. So let's finally go through this trilogy (and Paul) starting with, what else? Shaun of the Dead.

Plot: Shaun is a electronics shop employee who seem to have no direction in his life. He pretty much just goes to work and hangs with his best friend Ed, while taking his girlfriend Lilly to his favorite pub, The Winchester every night. But thing start to change when people in the neighborhood turn into zombies. So Shaun and Ed come up with a plan to take Lilly, Shaun's mom and step-dad, and Lilly's roommates David and Dianne and bring them to the Winchester for safety.

This film delivers very well in being both a comedy and a horror. Most of the jokes are pretty funny, and the actors do an excellent job delivering a lot of them. And it leads to some pretty memorable scenes and lines that I will often think about when I think of this movie. But it also follows very through in being a horror. I mean they don't make it really cheesy just because it's also a comedy, they give us the blood, gore, and the drama of being in a zombie apocalypse. In fact watching it again, I kind of found this movie to have more drama then there was any gore or jokes. Which is good because it really helps with what is happening with the characters, especially Shaun who is trying to grow from who he was before all of this happened and is trying to do something about it while dealing with his relationship with his best friend, his girlfriend, her roommates, his mother, and his stepfather. So you're rooting for him and the people he cares about, like you should in a movie that does give us some very intense and serious scenes about surviving. Now I've heard some people debate that this movie goes a little too far with the drama; that it becomes too intense or that it takes itself too seriously. And...yeah I can see where they're coming from. The third act of the movie - while still giving us some good jokes here and there - does give us some very dark and intense moments with the characters. And while I don't know if I would call it too far, the comedy does start to lack as the climax goes on. But I think even with that said, Shaun of the Dead can work for people who aren't fans of horror films in roughly the same way the Scream films work for people who aren't a fan of slasher films in that you may not be a fan of the genre, but the comedy helps you to enjoy it anyway to some degree.

And that's my review for Shaun of the Dead. It succeeds as both a comedy and a horror for people who like either one or both. The third act can be argued as being more horror than comedy, which might not be for everyone. If you don't like horror films but might be okay with this one because of its humor, give it a try. If you're fine with both but have never seen this movie before, it's an enjoyable film that I would recommend.

Rating: 90%

Dumb and Dumber (1994)

Okay so a couple weeks ago, Candra recommended that I see this movie. And seeing as how I hear about this movie a lot when it comes to movies and how some of it scenes where shot in the Stanley Hotel, which I've been to, I decided to finally settle the matter and find out what makes this movie so fairly known. So here's my take on Dumb and Dumber.

Plot: A pair of friends named Lloyd and Harry live together in an apartment in Rhode Island, and because of their dim-witted personalities, struggle at finding jobs. But when Lloyd falls in love with a woman named Mary during his previous job, and find out that she left her briefcase at the airport he took her too, he and Harry decide to go on a cross-country road trip to find Mary and return the briefcase. But they are also being chased by a group of criminals who are after the briefcase, knowing that it's full of money that is suppose to be used as ransom money.

Now as I've stated before in my review for Rat Race, it's very hard for me to genuinely laugh at something, even if it's one of the funniest things I've seen. And it's even harder to laugh at a comedy when you know that they expect you to get a laugh. So how does this movie hold up for me? Well...it's funny, but if we were comparing it to Rat Race, this movie made me laugh the least. Did I laugh so little that I think that it's a bad movie? No, not necessarily. Even if I wasn't laughing hard on the floor from the jokes they had, I did see the appeal as to why this particular comedy seem to be very commonly known. Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels are giving fun performances, and the dialogue has some jokes that were very well delivered. But while some jokes where good, the rest of it was just plain stupid. And I know, that's what they're going for, I mean it's in the title, but by knowing that, most of the jokes just did nothing for me in the slightest. Maybe if I was younger and less experienced in seeing these kinds of films it would leave a better impact on me, but for what it has right now, it's just not doing anything.

And that's my review for Dumb and Dumber. While it doesn't leave such a memorable impact on me as it seems to for a lot of people, it does have good performances, and some decent jokes. If you haven't seen this movie, it really depends on your sense of humor as to whether or not you would like it. But for me, It's just okay. I'm glad I saw it, but I don't think I would see it again.


Rating: 60%

Malefiecent (2014)

Well this has been out for a while, but as I more or less implied when I started my X-Men: Days of Future Past review, I don't have a lot of free time because of work. But I finally got the time and my friend Megan wanted to see this with me for the longest time, so here's how this turned out after finally seeing it.

Plot: Maleficent is a fairy who lives in this magical realm called The Moors which separates itself from the kingdom of the humans. She befriends and eventually falls in love with a boy named Stephan, but when the human king is dying and declares that the person who kill Maleficent will take his throne, Stephan drugs Maleficent and cuts off her wings and gives them to the king claiming he killed her and thus takes the throne. So when Stephan has a daughter named Aurora, Maleficent puts her on a curse that Aurora will prick her finger on a spinning wheel and forever sleep unless she is given true love's kiss.

So, how was this movie that was trying to give us a very interesting, Wicked-like, point of view of one of the most memorable Disney villains? Well... the key word to that sentence is "try". So what I'm basically saying is that for what it was trying to do in terms of basically giving us a Maleficent version of Wicked, it had some nice ideas - some of it fit and/or was beginning to fit - but unfortunately it was, what I felt, a few re-writes on the script away from really reaching its potential. Like it a lot of moments where it was beginning to be clever and interesting, but their execution of its ideas - while not ' holy crap' awful - either could've been given more time to explain why this is the case or just could've taken a better direction altogether. For example, you have her motive of cursing Aurora because she was in love with Stephan before he cuts off her wings. So with that, she has a more deep and personal reason to curse the baby, compared to her motive in Sleeping Beauty. And that's a good idea. But, then it gets jumbled when you have problems like how they don't really show what makes the human kingdom really hate The Moors - I mean they show that they hate it in the beginning, but their motive is completely non-existent - and to top that off, they don't go into detail as to how that kingdom seemed to corrupt Stephan to the point of taking her wings and then - without spoiling the movie - goes on this one direction for the remainder of the film that, while also a good idea, barely makes a lick of sense. All of this is just stuff from the first half hour of the movie, and it unfortunately continues this path for the remainder of its time. We'll get other ideas like making the raven, Diaval more of a character or the relationship between Maleficent and Aurora that, by concept, could've really strengthened where the movie was going, but either by choosing a poor direction or not allowing those ideas to really breathe, they make the film come out as more of a mess. Now thankfully, the movie doesn't come off as completely awful, because there are some nice elements to the movie despite ideas that just weren't' used all that well. Firstly, there's the style of the CGI. And don't get me wrong, they don't do a swell job in hiding that it's all fake, but at the same time, they stylized it well enough that I still enjoyed it when watching things like the fight in the beginning of the film, or just the creatures in The Moors. And there's of coarse Angelina Jolie as Maleficent. While she obviously is not going quite to big in terms of movement or voice as the Maleficent in the original (yeah I know I'm comparing, but that's kind of unavoidable for this kind of movie), she does hold her own in her performance and does indeed show that she looks the part almost flawlessly.

And that's my review for Maleficent. It does have some decent stylized CGI, a good performance from Angelina Jolie, and as far as story goes, had some ideas that could've worked with some adjustments. But those adjustments were never made, and so while I liked it for what it was trying to do, it still didn't succeed, making the movie a bit of a mess. If you just want a nice time watching a movie, you're probably going to like this fine, but it you wanted something deeper and darker with a well thought out plot, this movie is not really there, so you probably won't care for it.

Rating: 50%   

X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)

Yay! I have a day off from work and finally got to see X-Men: Days of Future Past!!! Now let's get into what I thought about it!

Plot: In a distant future, the world mutant and opposing humans who could have mutant offspring are being exterminated by robots called Sentinels. The X-men in this future learn that this was caused by Mystique killing the designer of the Sentinels, Bolivar Trask. So Kitty Pryde sends Wolverine back to the year 1973, where he has to find Professor Xavier and Magneto from during that year and help him stop Mystique and prevent the deadly future from ever happening.

Honestly, I'm still a little taken aback as to how this movie turned out in both good and kind of concerning ways. Now I want to make it clear that yes, this was definitely a good movie. With little to no doubt, even if it's not better than X-Men 2, it has to be at least the second or third best X-Men without really even trying. Heck, I'd say it would actually be my personal favorite of the series. (But that's coming from someone who did not grow up with X-Men, for those of you who love X-Men 2 more.) But at the same time, I find myself asking a lot of questions throughout the movie. Some of them where answered and done fairly well, which I'm pretty happy about. Other explanations...are while were indeed given, I feel they could've been delivered a lot better. Particularly with what exactly happened in the past between X-Men: First Class, and what's happening right now witht he younger versions of Xavier, Magneto and Mystique. And the premise of the story has a major flaw with Kitty's apparent ability to send people back in time. It has nothing to do with her phasing abilities, it's not something that was never in the comics, it just basically came out of nowhere. I guess you could make the argument that it was something that she got in the future by growing up and gaining new abilities or something like that, but they don't give us any explanation whatsoever so that's am issue. But enough about what problems I have about this movie, let's talk about what's good about it, cause there is a lot of stuff to really like about it. First, there's the action, which comes off much bigger and in some respects, smarter and well thought out than the action form the previous films. Not that the action was completely terrible in the last films, but comparing how the battles where a lot of mutants are fighting here, to what was happening in the third film where it was a little confusing and out of focus, they clearly put much more thought into the idea. There's also the moments around the first half of the movie where things are done in slow motion, particularly with Quicksilver that are surprisingly very well made. I know that seems like an odd thing to say, but some of these slow motions shots were really stylized, and I can't help but really enjoy that, as well as Quicksilver himself as much of a bummer as it is that he's not in the movie for very long. Secondly, there's the acting. While Ian Mckellen and Patrick Stewart go without saying as to how awesome it is to see them again, it's also nice to see Wolverine and how he interacts with the past versions of Xavier and Magneto while still being bad-a and funny, even if he has his bone claws throughout the majority of the movie. And it was nice to see James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, and Jenifer Lawrence again. I also very intrigued to have Peter Dinklage as Bolivar Trask. Granted, that character is not a dwarf in the comics, but at the same time, it's an interesting idea, Dinklage is a very good actor, and he gives a good performance here, so you kinda just let the matter go. And finally there's the story. Now true, the concept of going back in time to fix the future that is destroyed by robots is by no means original by today's standards. But to be fair, this is loosely based off a comic book storyline that was made in the very early 80s. Plus, I do think it has some of it's own different take on it with focusing on both the future and the past instead of just the past, and the fact that Wolverine technically isn't completely in the past. He has his body still in the future, but he's controlling his body from the past and he has to be protected in the future while he's still on his mission. That's actually a little unique, and having his real body stay in the future, does help with being focused on both points in time. And while the story is done very loosely, they do make up for it by giving the characters from the past these different situations that helps keep the story interesting. Was it always done right? Not really. Because like I said, while the explanations where indeed given, they needed a little more work. Because let's face it, they give us a lot of big stuff that happens between the events in First Class and the events in 1973, and they mainly told us what happened instead of showing it. That does bother me a lot. But ultimately it does lead to a climax that gives us an ending similar to the end of Captain America: The Winter Soldier, that leaves me excited to find out what they're going to do next and if they're going to take every advantage to what is happening.

And that's my review for X-Men: Days of Future Past. I have my problems with how they explained some of the things that happen in the movie, but at the end of the day, it was a great step forward and a big improvement  in the X-Men franchise after X-Men: The Last Stand. The acting was good, the action was enjoyable and it has a good story that leaves you wanting to find out what they're going to do next. If you are an X-Men fan, and you want to see this movie, you should definitely do so. If you're not a fan and you haven't seen all of the X-Men/Wolverine films, you should do so first to understand and also appreciate what they're doing here.

Rating: 85%

Leon: The Professional (1994)

So a couple of months back, my friend Blaine showed me a bunch of movies that I had yet to see that we wanted to show me. And due to being busy and stuff like that, I have been holding back in reviewing these films, so I'm going to try to start changing that by finally reviewing some of them. So time for me to play catch up on my reviews, starting with probably the most interesting of the ones that I've seen; Leon: The Professional.

Plot: Leon is a skilled hitman who lives a quiet and solitary life in Little Italy whose only friends are his houseplant and a young girl named Mathilda who lives with her dysfunctional family in an apartment next door to Leon's. But when Mathilda's family is murdered by corrupt DEA agents lead by Norman Stansfield, Leon rescues her from getting killed as well, and gives her shelter. She quickly learns that he is a hitman and asks him to take care of her and teach her his skills in making hits in the hopes of using them to avenge the death of her little brother, who was the only person in her family that she cared about.

Dang. What a movie. Now I'll start off stating the obvious reason that this would be good; such as the directing, cinematography, and the all around story, all of which are great. But there a couple of things that stand out the most for me as well as probably most people who have seen this film. The first thing is what made me the most interested to see this movie, and that's the fact that this was Natalie Portman's very first film. And holy cow is it remarkable that this is the film that started her career and that she gave such a performance for her first film. Mathilda is a young girl who goes through this serious stuff throughout the movie and Portman does a beautiful job at acting out what this character does in all of these scenes. And think about it for a moment, we're talking about the actress whom most people commonly know her best as being Padme Amidala in the Star Wars prequels. It also makes it remarkable that she made a performance that big at such a young age long before she gave us her stunning performance in Black Swan. The second thing that seems to stand out the most is Gary Oldman as Norman Stansfield. Looking more into how people felt about the character, a lot of sites such as RottenTomatoes and Hollywood.com have viewed Stansfield as one of the greatest villains in cinema. I don't know for a fact if I would go that far, but even if I would disagree with people viewing him that way, there's no denying that Gary Oldman is giving us some of his best into this role, and it's often fun to see what he's doing. Then there's the third and probably biggest thing that stands out about this film: the realtionship between Leon and Mathilda. Their relationship in retrospect is very unusual, which makes it both very original, and yet occasionally uncomfortable. Leon and Mathilda work off each other very well and it is really nice to see them try to help out each other whether it is to entertain each other or Leon teaching Mathilda on how to be a hitman. But it also comes with some moments that where just plain uncomfortable. Now I want to point out that nothing really happens between the two characters. Sorry if that counts as spoilers for any of you, but if you are like me and you would feel uncomfortable about some of the scenes between the main characters, do know now before you see the movie that nothing actually happens between them. But regardless, it's still entertaining in an unusual way to see these characters with their different traits and personalities work off each other that generally makes this movie.

And that's my review for Loan: The Professional. I know I didn't really talk a whole lot about how it is as a film in general, but this particular film does seem to be one that, while it really is a good film with it's directing and cinematography and stuff, what makes it stand out are the three main actors and their characters, for the reason I have talked about. It's a great, memorable film that if you haven't seen it yet but would like to, I recommend it. 

Rating: 90%

Rat Race (2001)

Well a couple of weeks ago, Candra wanted to show me this film and so we decided to see it together after I came home from work. So this is pretty much how it turned out.

Plot: A group of people win six special tokens in a hotel in Las Vegas, that leads them to meet the hotel's eccentric owner Sinclair. Sinclair tells them that there is a duffel bag with $2 million dollars in it in a train station locker in Silver City, New Mexico. Each team of people are given a key to open the locker and claim the money. So the race is on in trying to get the $2 million dollars first, with none of the contestants knowing that Sinclair is using the race as a way to entertain the high rollers visiting his hotel.

I will start off my saying one thing I got from seeing this movie with Candra. It made me laugh. Why would I just start off this review by saying that? Because the matter of will I or wont I laugh was basically my main train of thought as Candra and I were getting ready to watch the movie. I don't laugh very often - even from things that are particularly funny to me like How I Met Your Mother or The Nostalgia Critic - and it's even harder to laugh at a movie where it's specific genre is comedy and therefore, they expect me to laugh when I see it. So when I started watching the movie, I was concerned that I wouldn't laugh at all as much as I would want to seeing as it's a comedy and so it expects me to laugh. But thankfully, it did make me laugh. Not regularly, or so much that I would be on the floor, but I still laughed, and I'm glad I did. So I guess this is my long way of saying that this film does hold up well as a comedy. It has very likable characters, some of the dialogue is a little clever, and a lot of the scenes during the race where just fun to watch. My personal favorite scenes where the helicopter chase, and some of the scenes from either the brothers or the family. There are moments where the comedy goes a little too far for me or appears tasteless, such as some of the scenes with the cow or the scene where the family was in that World War II veterans meeting. But those moments where very few, so they didn't bother me very much. The casting is also very enjoyable with having a lot of familiar faces such as Whoopi Goldberg, Seth Green, Cuba Gooding Jr., Rowan Atkinson, and my personal favorites from the film, John Cleese and surprisingly Kathy Bates. If I have to pick one particular problem I have with the film, it would be the ending. Now let me make it clear, it's not that what the characters do in the end isn't good. Far from it. It's just that as nice as it is, it's a very...off kind of ending for the film. There was no build up to it, part of it didn't make sense, and it just generally went against where the plot was going.

And that's my review for Rat Race. It has it's problems with the endings and some of its jokes, but it still had likable characters, fun scenes, and comedy that made it an enjoyable film for me. Is it the greatest comedy I've ever seen? No. But it still is funny, and for what I was wondering about coming into this movie, I am thankful that I found it that way.  

Rating: 70%