Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens

Non-Spoiler review. I'm gonna do a more spoilery review in a few days.

Okay, lets get this out of the way. I've already seen it more than once, and I loved it more the second time. Granted, it's probably still only the the third best Star Wars film, but that's not a bad thing. It kills all of the prequels (there were prequels?) by a long shot. The Force Awakens might as well been called "The Faith Restored". Thank you JJ Abrams for being the Star Wars fan I thought you were.

I've heard this is a Star Wars movie that can be seen by someone that's never seen a Star War before and still enjoy it, and that's definitely true. The Force Awakens has a short learning curve.

I'll get the bad out of the way first. The main issue I had with the film is that it recycles a lot of plot points from previous Star Wars films, but I look at that as if you're gonna try to restore faith and recapture a lost audience, might as well start from a safe place. Even with the basic Star Wars plot, it leaves a lot of questions open where you can see potential places where the sequels may go. It's not completely obvious where the next films will go. My only other real disappointment in the film is that the score wasn't all that remarkable. It has the old Star Wars musical cues we all know, but I didn't hear anything new that blew me away.

On to the light side. The new characters are fantastic! I wasn't sure how the new guys would play, but they totally carry the movie and you care about each of them. They succeed in bringing a new generation of fans to the franchise. Finn is a great, funny, original character. Rey is the new, upgraded Leia for the next generation. Poe wasn't in the movie all that much, but he just became the Star Wars character I'd most like to have a beer with. Kylo Ren plays the intimidating, conflicted villain that the series needs. I can't wait to see what they all do in the rest of the series.

The action is great and the film is shot beautifully. If you're worried about JJ Abrams lense-flare, then worry not. It's non-existent. There's a lot of creative and interesting shots that we've never seen in a Star Wars movie before. None of the long, walking exposition shots to be found here, nor any of the shot/reverse-shot style of dialog. The film is paced beautifully. I don't think I took a breath the first 30 minutes of the movie either time I saw it.

It's easily the funniest Star Wars film as well. JJ Abrams nails the humor and character interaction. The dialog is a vast improvement over anything the the prequels. The stunted dialog and robotic behavior is completely gone! It's an emotional film, too! I got choked up a few times the first time I saw it, but even more so the second time when seeing my nephews react to it. This is the nostalgia I needed.

Star Wars: The Force Awakens is the Star Wars movie you're looking for. While derivative, it delivers the fun, action and humor fans craved. It successfully restores faith in the franchise, and gives it the kick in the pants it needed. This is fun for the whole family!

5 (out of 5) Death Stars - Yes, I'm grading on a curve. It's a flawed movie. I don't care!

Mind Blown!

The Age of Adaline (2015)

Not to be confused with The Age of Ultron, even though this does start with a fairy tale/sci-fi quality to it. I wish it had keep that feel throughout the film.

The premise is interesting enough, but the themes aren't exactly new. After an accident Adaline learns she no longer ages. To avoid being captured and studied, she moves around a lot and changes her identity frequently, but always manages to come back to San Francisco. You'd think anyone looking for her would just keep an eye out in SF for someone that looks like her. It doesn't help that she has a few distinguishing physical characteristics that would give her away.

I like how she used her limitless time to learn. She knew many languages, was a student of history and had all kinds of skills. I'd like to think that if anyone had this kind of time, you'd use it to improve in a similar fashion. Then again, a good majority of us don't use our time like this. How many 80-90 year olds can you think of that can speak lots of languages and remember all kinds of trivia? I guess her condition would allow her to stay sharp though.

The film seemed to care more about showing you how it's really a lonely, miserable experience instead. Everyone you've ever known continues to grow old and die. Can you risk falling in love under those circumstances? It's a tough thing to deal with, for sure, but the movie starts to drag as it repeats this theme over and over.

Blake Lively was charming, but a little flat. I think that's just how she comes off to me. Maybe cold is a better way to describe her. It probably didn't help that her character was kind of a dick. When she meets a guy, she quickly blows them off, sometimes very rudely. If you're so worried about hurting feelings or leading someone on, why not just wear a fake wedding ring to scare off most potential suitors. Hell, she had a wedding ring as she was married before this all happened to her. Nobody needs to know he died a long time ago. Just tell them you're married and then move on. Seems like a simple solution to a complex problem. This guy won't take no for an answer though and just wears her down. When I do that, it's called 'stalking'.

I'd be a little worried about hooking up, too. What if you catch something and you're stuck with it forever.

I also thought it was odd that she appeared to get the same type of dog over and over. You're worried about the heartbreak of falling in love, but you're willing to put yourself through the loss of a dog every few years?

Then, there's a 'twist' towards the end that give the film a super icky quality, and I couldn't take it seriously at all from that point.

It's a okay enough movie. A little too sad and creepy to be a good date movie. Judging by the crowd I saw it with, it seems like something you'd maybe want to take your grandparents to see.

2.5 (out of 5) Death Stars

Ender's Game (2013)

I could have used a little more Death Blossom.

Throughout Ender's Game I was reminded of The Last Starfighter, a favorite film of mine when I was a kid.  It's interesting to note that the original book was released a year after The Last Starfighter.  I'm not saying Ender's Game ripped off The Last Starfighter, but I wonder how much inspiration was drawn from it, or was it all just a coincidence.  The Last Starfighter could use an update, so even if Ender's Game had been a direct rip-off, it wouldn't have bugged me that much.

I haven't read Ender's Game.  Hell, I was only vaguely aware of its existence the first time I saw the trailer, so if you're looking for a comparison of the book to film adaptation, you'll need to look elsewhere.  I've also heard people say it was unfilmable, which didn't seem like that case while watching.   Maybe at the time of writing it was.  Modern technology sure seems to be making a lot of these supposed unfilmable movies a reality lately.

In the future, Earth is attacked by an alien race known as the Formics.  They were beaten back, but humanity has been preparing for their return ever since.  Children a trained at a young age to find the best candidate to lead the fleet.  Why children?  They learn and adapt quicker, are more adept at thinking outside the box, and let's face it, they are better at playing video games.  Ender Wiggin (Asa Butterfield) is recognized early by Colonel Graff (Harrison Ford) as the strongest candidate.  He's put through a series of simulations and games to test his strategy and leadership abilities.  He quickly rises through the ranks and eventually gains the respect of his peers.  With the next battle likely determining the fate of the human race, will Ender be ready in time and handle the responsibility and pressure being put upon him?

At it's heart, Ender's Game feels like one of those classic stories of a child being told there's greatness within him and slowly gaining the confidence to realize that potential.  The kid in me found it easy to identify with and go along for ride.  While PG-13, I thought about how much my 8-year-old nephew would have enjoyed it, and I do think it's suitable for kids in that age range.  It helps that a lot of what's effective about Ender's Game is seeing how Ender deals with the consequences of his actions.  Not being familiar with the story, I was a little surprised with how it played out and thought it was a nice twist.  I've heard from some that the book is smarter, but when isn't that the case?  I also thought there was a nice message about standing up to bullies.  Bullies should also be on notice, as you never know when the guy you're picking on knows all your weaknesses and is ready to mop the floor with you.

Although considering the fact that the boy that saves the day was the best at games and video game simulations, you might want to avoid giving your kids the ammo that allowing them to play more video games may mean the difference between life and death in the future.  I do think it's interesting that book was written back in 1985, and had a pretty forward thinking view regarding the adaptability of children and how it relates to playing video games.  Maybe I'm reading a bit too much into that though.

The timeline felt a little rushed with how quickly Ender was progressing through the ranks.  It seemed like just a day or two would go by before he was being promoted again.  I remember at one point seeing a readout saying they had 20-something days before the next attack, but it wasn't quite clear to me.  Did only just a few weeks transpire or did this take place over a few months?  If it was a really short period of time, it might have helped to have some kind of throwaway line about accelerated learning technology or something.  However, there are a few scenes involving space travel where you can see they were in stasis, which would imply that more time was elapsing, so it felt like a few steps were being skipped in the transitions that might have explained it better.  Having said all that, I felt Ender's Game was paced well and wouldn't have minded if it was a few minutes longer.  I thought Gavin Hood did a good job with the material.  I can't comment on how faithful this is to the book, but after watching X-Men Origins: Wolverine, I'm just happy this wasn't a train wreck.  It certainly seems to lend weight to the belief that X-Men Origins: Wolverine was a case of massive studio interference.

I enjoyed the special effects and the overall look of Ender's Game.  It felt sufficiently futuristic without having technology that seemed impossible or way too ahead of its time.  I really liked the design of the Formics ships and worlds.  It had a very organic, alien look, and I was reminded of the Yuuzhan Vong from the Star Wars Expanded Universe.  Thankfully it's not in 3D, so you won't have to contend with that.  I did see it in IMAX, and while I always enjoy the format, you don't need to wait for IMAX as it's not that big of a deal.

I also enjoyed the performances.  The film is anchored by Asa Butterfield's sympathetic portrayal of Ender.  Let's face it, had they cast the wrong kid, or you don't buy into his performance, then the whole film kind of falls apart.  Butterfield's had a pretty strong start to his career and I think we can expect to see a lot more from him.  After a disappointing performance in the recent Romeo and Juliet, Hailee Steinfeld bounces back with a stronger performance here, and I thought she good chemistry with Butterfield.  It was fun to see Moises Arias' antagonistic turn as Bonzo, whom I totally thought they were calling "Bonesaw".  Wouldn't that be such a natural nickname for someone named Bonzo though?  Ben Kingsley and Viola Davis are also very good in their limited roles, but I'm convinced neither actor is capable of delivering a bad performance.  Finally, I was happy to see Harrison Ford not mailing it in for a change.  This is the most invested I've seen him in a long time, and you get the feeling he must have really cared about the story.

Ender's Game is a fun adventure that'll appeal to the kid in you.  It's well-acted, has great effects, and the whole family can enjoy together.  It's not a game changer, or something that's gonna make you want to throw out your copy of The Last Starfighter, but there's definitely enough entertainment value that makes it worth a watch.  I recommend a matinee.

3.5 (out of 5) Death Stars

42 (2013)

That poster makes it look like Jackie Robinson is clinging for his life as he slides off a cliff...

As much as I shudder every time I see "Based on a True Story", it's refreshing when I see it on a movie about someone and something I have more than just a vague awareness of.  42 is one such movie, about the introduction of Jackie Robinson, the first African-American player in Major League Baseball, to the (then) Brooklyn Dodgers in the mid-40's.

Branch Rickey (Harrison Ford), general manager of the Dodgers, decided for various reasons that it was time to break baseball's 'color barrier'.  He started the search for the right man, and quickly decided on Robinson (Chadwick Boseman), a star athlete for UCLA and Army veteran.  Ricky felt that Robinson had the right personality and skill set to succeed in what he knew was going to be very difficult situation.  Robinson was an intelligent and confident man, willing to speak and stand up for himself, but Rickey asked him not to do this.  The reason for this was simple enough; even if Robinson was provoked, any retaliation would be used by his detractors as examples of Robinson's inability to handle the game or pressure, or even reversing it and saying he's the one that instigated.  So, Robinson has to bite his tongue, look the other way, and do everything in his power not to fight.  You see him put up with an amazing amount of shit, and you can only sympathize.  Despite his struggles, he's (still) a hero and inspiration to many.

Like Moneyball, 42 is a baseball movie that doesn't require intimate knowledge of the game.  It's not stat driven, even though the opening monologue might make you think that for a second (and Branch Rickey happened to be one of the pioneers of statistical analysis in baseball).  Also, like Moneyball, some of the actual baseball elements were some of the weakest of film.  In some cases they felt really inaccurate.  Many scenes are shot in a way where you can't see a swing or pitch, or what you do see is awkward to the point where it's doesn't look athletic.  At the end of the film, Robinson hits a homer and you hear the announcer say the Dodgers have won the pennant, when I'm petty sure it was only the first inning.  You don't see anyone walking off the field as if it was a walk-off, and the teammate that congratulates him as he reaches home simply looks like he's ready for his at bat.  These aren't huge mistakes, but I think it's the kind stuff that purists are going to notice.

Then again, baseball is kind of boring.  They have to focus on exciting sequences of Robinson taking a walk, or attempts to pick him off first, cause that's all the game really had to offer at that point.  No steroids in baseball back then.  Yes, I'm just kidding around.  Chadwick Boseman as Robinson managed to show a playfulness when on base, seemingly taking delight in the disruption he'd cause on the basepaths.  Boseman even resembled Robinson, and did a good job of mimicking his batting stance (the actual swing looked a little off though).

Also as far as the overall look of the film, I liked that as well.  I thought they did a great job of recreating the look of some of those older uniforms and ballparks, without getting overly nostalgic about it.  I like when a period piece doesn't go out of the way to draw your attention to all the details they cram in there, and just lets you enjoy it.

I also thought there was a lot of colorful dialog throughout the film as well.  Writer and director Brian Helgeland did a good job keeping it interesting while being respectful to the man and the period.  Outside of a few things here and there, there's not a lot of chances taken though.  Overall, I would call it a very workmanlike effort.  I was surprised at the amount of humor.  It made a movie with so much weight a little easier to get through, and it seemed to quicken the pace a bit.  Some of the humor came off as unintentional though.

Harrison Ford gives one of his better performances in recent memory. He's been very grumbly and disinterested in many recent movies, but here he has a fiery passion about him.  Dr. Cox from Scrubs (John C. McGinley) has a subtlety comic performance as the Dodgers play-by-play announcer.  He was one of the smaller things I really enjoyed about the film and I think it may go largely unnoticed.  Alan Tudyk plays an opposing manager and single-handedly attempts to break Django Unchained's record for most uses of the 'n-word' in a 5-minute scene.  If it hadn't had been Tudyk playing the role, I think it would have affected me a little more in a negative sense, but the more he does it, the more it becomes unintentionally funny.  I also really enjoyed Christopher Meloni as manager Leo Derocher, but he's unfortunately not in the movie enough.  Derocher seems like a character that would make for an interesting biopic all on his own.  Even Lucas Black was enjoyable as Pee Wee Reese.

I've already mentioned a little about Boseman's performance, but I thought he did a great job as Jackie Robinson.  It's a good example of how casting a relative unknown in such an iconic role can help your movie.  If you got someone with a bigger name to play it, I think you'd have to fight the thoughts of, "Oh that's just 'x' playing Robinson."  Another standout was Nicole Beharie as Jackie's wife, Rachel.  She was definitely his rock, and you can imagine how without her, Jackie would have had a harder time dealing with all the abuse.

I think the biggest flaw of the film is that there's a very Hollywood quality about it.  I've always hated using the term "Hollywood" as a criticism.  It's a little nebulous.  With 42, I'm more referring to the overall cheesiness of the film.  Like many stories based on real events, a lot of things are streamlined or arranged to make for cleaner and more dramatic storytelling.  Maybe I'm just a little jaded from watching these types of films, where I just can't trust how much played out exactly like you see on screen or how much was done to manipulate the audience.  I also thought the sweeping score was too dramatic to the point of being distracting.  It reminded me of the score from some of the recent Spielberg films.  That's not to say that it wasn't affecting though.  There are times you're sitting in your seat wishing you could fight these people on Robinson's behalf.

42 is a good, crowd pleasing film, with lots of strong performances and interesting dialog.  You definitely don't have to be a baseball fan to get something out if it, and it's important to see what a inspirational figure Jackie Robinson was.  It's not a perfect film, but worth a matinee.

3 (out of 5) Death Stars