The Walk (2015)

Do you ever get that weird feeling that goes right down to your bones when looking down at heights? It doesn't even matter if it's a picture or a video game, it's some automatic thing that you're just wired with. If you get that feeling, then be warned that a good 40 minutes of The Walk will do that to you.

The Walk is an interesting story about a real event, but it's unusually, and sometimes unnecessarily narrated by Joseph Gordon-Levitt, playing Philippe Petit, the man that actually walked a tightrope between the Twin Towers. It constantly breaks up the story and is an example of the movie telling you rather than showing you. This is especially unusual since The Walk hangs so much on the visual aspect of it. It's also a little weird to see so much narration to a story that's already has an Oscar winning documentary about it. If you want to know how Petit really felt about his walk, just watch Man on Wire on Netflix. It kind of makes the whole movie feel like overkill, only existing to show you how good the CG is.

The cast is good though, and I enjoyed Joseph Gordon-Levitt's performance. I didn't even find his accent annoying, and after a while I forgot I was watching JGL. He's done a pretty good job of doing roles that are different from film to film, rather than playing the same character over and over. The characters take a backseat to the real star of the film, the computer generated Twin Towers. It's done so well and they are shot so lovingly that much of The Walk feels like a tribute to them. Even the way Petit speaks about them seems like he's in love with them.

The final act of The Walk is what you're really waiting for, and it's a doozy. The effects and cinematography are both excellent. It's one of the few times where seeing something in IMAX 3D really felt worth it, as it adds that extra depth to the experience.

I found this to be an interesting contrast to what I saw in Everest. In Everest, I didn't have much sympathy for the characters, and thought what they were doing was nuts. I also thought Petit was nuts, but super ballsy, and oddly poetic. Perhaps it's because Petit considered himself an artist, and I connected with that on some level.

The Walk is a mixed bag of uneven drama, but great, thrilling visuals. I do think it's worth seeing on IMAX if available to you though. Also, if you haven't seen it yet, I'd really recommend you watch Man on Wire, which is a really great documentary about the real event.

3 (out of 5) Death Stars

The Lone Ranger (2013)

"My favorite part was when the horse drank a beer and burped" - My 5-year-old nephew.

This is the kind of humor you can expect from The Lone Ranger, Disney's latest resurrection of an old character that nobody was asking for.  You also get to see things like a grown man having his head dragged through fresh horseshit, and Tonto repeatedly attempt to feed a dead bird as a gag.  You might think then that The Lone Ranger is a movie geared towards kids.  Well, it also features a scene of the main villain eating someones heart (although its not seen clearly), many people are shot several times, and others are brutally killed when thrown from moving trains while watching their bodies hit the ground and violently roll away.  The disconnect in tone makes it really hard to pin down exactly what kind of movie it was supposed to be or whom it's meant for.  Brutal violence juxtaposed with childish attempts at humor.  This is a Disney film?  If you're expecting family entertainment, you might have to be careful depending on what you want your kids to see.

I realize I'm being a bit of a hypocrite here as I saw The Lone Ranger with my 5 and 8-year-old nephews (and their mother), but they cut their teeth on the Indiana Jones movies, which also feature scary moments and brutal violence, so we knew that The Lone Ranger wasn't anything they wouldn't be able handle.  The younger of the two slept through most of the film anyway, so it really captivated his attention.  Oh, and don't think for a second that The Lone Ranger is in the same league as the Indiana Jones series.  Well, maybe except for The Crystal Skull.  I'm still irritated with how bad that movie was.

Anyway, my older nephew said his favorite parts were "that crazy horse" and "all the train parts", and that's really the strength of the film.  It's bookended with two pretty entertaining scenes, although I thought the final one was a little much.  That leads into one of the other main problems of the film in that it's way too long.  In between these two action scenes is two hours of meandering backstory, undeveloped side characters, and just general nothingness.

When watching The Lone Ranger, it will feel like something that was assembled together from various parts of other films.  At times it's a serious western, then it's a buddy cop film; there's undeveloped mystical elements, and a shoehorned love interest.  I get the vibe that even the writers (and there were three of them)  and director Gore Verbinski weren't sure what type of film they wanted to make, so they just tried a little bit of everything and hoped that something would stick.

Within the plot - what little there is of one - there didn't seem to be any concept of time or distance.  Characters appear when convenient or needed by the script.  Early in the film, you see Tonto in a jail cell, but in the very next scene, he's not only out of jail, but he's caught up with people that have been on horseback for several hours.  A character even asks Tonto how he got out of jail, only to not answer the question.  Just because you acknowledge the inconsistency to the audience, it doesn't let you off the hook for it, especially if you don't even bother to answer your own question.

Adding to this, I'm not even sure why this was called The Lone Ranger.  It's really all about Tonto.  The story is told from his perspective, you get more of his backstory, and he's the only competent one that does anything effective.  I get that they were trying to capitalize on Johnny Depp's star power and the Pirates connection, but while Depp is one of the only good things about the film, Tonto doesn't have any of the charm of Captain Jack Sparrow.

Armie Hammer as "The Ranger", is more of a secondary character.  He's never all that interesting or compelling.  This isn't the fault of Hammer or his performance - I like Armie Hammer - it's just not very well written.  They don't give you any reason to think he's a badass or even a capable hero.  In fact, they make a point of stating several times that he's not a fan of guns and refuses to use them on multiple occasions.  Yet every time he does shoot a gun, he hits his target perfectly.  He does this on accident at times, so you don't see where any skill comes in.  Tonto states he cannot be killed in battle, but never really delve into that either.  However, they do show you that both he and Tonto and superheroes.  In that early action scene, they are thrown from a speeding train and you see them roll around at high speed.  You see others in the film die from this, but after they are just sitting there without a scratch on them.  Later in the film, they fall from great heights without any ill effect.  I'm sure this is meant to be ridiculous action like many Summer films, but most films work up to that kind of ridiculousness as the film goes on, or even after a sequel or two.  The Lone Ranger starts with "god mode" turned on.

William Fichtner plays the main villain, and he's one of my favorite scenery chewing actors.  He was the best thing about Drive Angry and was I was able to enjoy that.  He does his usual great work, but he was underutilized.  None of the cast really has all that much to do.  Ruth Wilson, who I loved on Luther, seems to just be in the film to scream a few times and doesn't have much of a character beyond that.  Despite what you see in trailers, Helena Bonham Carter is barely in the film, so if you're expecting something from her, then you're going to be disappointed.  Tom Wilkinson is wasted as well.  Barry Pepper and James Badge Dale round out the supporting cast, but they don't have much going on either.

Before I finish up, I have to mention how hard it was not to type "The Long Ranger" instead of "The Lone Ranger".  I wonder why that is?  "The Long Ranger" sounds like a porn.  I'm sure when the Adult Film community gets around to their version they'll call it that.  If so, I want a cut, or at least a free copy.

I don't think The Lone Ranger is necessarily as bad as I've heard going in, but it's definitely a difficult movie to recommend.  I didn't come out of it absolutely hating it or thinking it was a total waste of time, but it's something I'll never watch again.  There are some entertaining action scenes and Johnny Depp has a few good moments, but it's way too long, and the story and tone are all over the place.  There's just not much to enjoy otherwise.  Depending on your view, it's not even suitable for the family.  It's a movie nobody was asking for and is just a ho-hum, forgettable summer film.  It's a rental.

2 (out of 5) Death Stars

World War Z (2013)

Let the debate between the fast-moving zombie versus the traditional, slow-moving zombie commence...

To be honest with you, the whole fast-moving zombie thing has never really bugged me.  Since zombies aren't real, you can pretty much do anything you want with them.  It don't care either way, and there are great examples of either type being effective and terrifying.  That wasn't what worried me about World War Z.  I was more concerned with how bad the CG looked, and that it was PG-13, leading me to think the movie would be very tame and pedestrian.  I also heard fans of the book were upset with the changes made to the point where some have said the only thing the book and film have in common are the title.  I haven't read the book, so I won't be commenting on that part though.  Fortunately, World War Z wasn't as bad as I feared, but it misses the mark about as much as it hits.

We meet Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt) as he prepares for a regular day with the family.  Gerry's retired recently so he could spend more time with his wife (Mireille Enos) and kids.  Even though we don't see much of them, I liked this part as it did a good job of setting up the Lane's as a loving family, and gives you something to care about.  I am a little disappointed Mireille Enos wasn't given more to do though.  I'm a big fan of The Killing and thought World War Z might let a larger audience see what she can do, but most people are probably going to remember her as "Brad Pitt's wife from that zombie movie."

Shortly after, we see them sitting in traffic.  An explosion happens in the distance, and everyone's in a panic to escape what appears to be a rapidly growing wave of zombies attacking everything in their path.  They kind of reminded me of a Zerg swarm.  Gerry and his family narrowly escape the city and end up on a military vessel where we learn more about the zombie outbreak and how widespread it's become.

The military forces Gerry back into action, as he's the best as what he does.  What is he the best at, you ask?  Kicking ass?  Wrong!  Investigating stuff...for the UN!  Gerry goes from location to location in an effort to track down the source of the infection, or "Patient Zero".

What I liked about World War Z is that despite that most of the film to this point is pretty much exactly what you see in the trailer, it still managed to be very intense and thrilling.  WWZ wastes no time getting to the point.  We're barely five minutes into the film before the outbreak begins.  I also felt like the film was a realistic depiction of the early stages of a zombie invasion.  We see there's still a command structure and military force.  There's a pointed effort to find the cause and hopefully find a cure.  People make decisions that are much more pragmatic (there's a great example of this at the midway point), and you thankfully don't see a majority of the characters do stupid things once the shit hits the fan.  The cast does a good job of taking the material seriously, and the movie avoids any camp or silliness.

On the other hand I think striving for a PG-13 rating detracted from that realism.  When the outbreak happens, I'd expect to see people screaming and swearing their heads off, but I don't think I heard anyone swear.  Also, the movie is almost completely bloodless, which I find odd for a zombie film.  All points of impact are cut away from, and there are other times where you can see someone struggling against something that's off screen.  You can see gorier stuff each week on The Walking Dead.  Some might appreciate the lack of gore, but not seeing any blood when people are being bitten and hacked doesn't work for me.  I think the decisions director Marc Forster made at times seemed to be geared towards getting more people in the theater rather than making a zombie film strictly for fans of the genre. That isn't a bad thing necessarily, but it usually means you have to make some sacrifices, and I think those sacrifices hurt the film.

Finally, we get to the end, and it's very abrupt and unsatisfying.  I sat there thinking, "Really?  That's it?"  It felt like they didn't know how they wanted to end it.  I heard they did a large amount of reshoots to get us to the current ending, as well.  If this was the improved ending after all the reshoots, I can't imagine how bad the original ending was.  I'll be curious if there's an alternate cut when the Blu-Ray comes out.  For example, Matthew Fox has a bizarre cameo where you barely see his face on screen.  It makes he think he might have had a bigger role and was a casualty of all the reshoots.  I'm guessing having four writers didn't help with the ending (Matthew Michael Carnahan, Drew Goddard, Damon Lindelof, J. Michael Straczynski).  I've heard there may have even been more writers involved that weren't credited.  That helps explain why it's so uneven.

The special effects didn't help either.  While not as bad as what the trailer made it look like, there were still lots of times I felt the zombies looked artificial and rubbery.  Even when standing around they moved as if they suffered from Tourette's, twitching and chomping their teeth.  This caused a lot uncomfortable laughter at times.  I suppose it helped break the tension a bit though.

World War Z is a mainstream zombie film, but I think that's part of what holds it back.  While it manages to entertain and keep a high level of tension, the rating keeps this a tame affair.  It's a shame as there are some smart and realistic ideas in there, but the ending leaves you disappointed and wish there had been more.  I'm right on the border of rental and matinee on this one.  It's not a bad film, but it's really going to depend on how much you want to see it.

2.5 (out of 5) Death Stars

Iron Man 3 (2013)

Given the choice, I would definitely rather be Tony Stark than Bruce Wayne...

So, it's finally here.  The conclusion to the first Iron Man trilogy, and the beginning of Marvel: Phase 2.  Right off, I can tell you that Iron Man 3 is definitely a step up from Iron Man 2, so if you're like me and was disappointed in IM2 (and thought it suffered from sequelitis), then you're going to enjoy IM3 a whole lot more.

Iron Man 3 is loosely based on the "Extremis" story arc from the Iron Man comics.  I can't claim I'm super well versed in the Iron Man comics, so I can't comment on how faithful it is to them.  I am a little more familiar with the Mandarin though, so I was initially a little concerned about his choice as the main villain for IM3 and casting Sir Ben Kingsley to play him.  I'm a huge fan of Kingsley, so it's not an issue of ability, but in the comics, the Mandarin was of Chinese descent, where Kingsley isn't to my knowledge.  I just didn't think the character was going to translate particularly well on screen.  Comic book purists may be a little upset with how his arc plays out, but I think that that not only did Kingsley do a great job, they actually did a pretty clever twist the character that made it work.  This is one instance where I don't mind that the movie took some liberty with a known comic character.

In the film, the Mandarin is a terrorist that has the world on edge with a series of bombings and menacing threats.  Little is known about him, or where he even is.  Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), on the other hand, isn't too concerned with this yet.  He's been dealing with severe anxiety issues since the events of The Avengers, and can barely sleep.  The only way he can deal with everything is to constantly tinker and build more Iron Man suits.  He's still with Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), who's continuing to run Stark Industries.  Some old associates, Aldrich Killian (Guy Pearce) and Maya Hansen (Rebecca Hall), approach Stark Industries about working with them on their Extremis project, an experimental treatment that has a variety of uses.  Meanwhile, Rhodey (Don Cheadle) has been rebranded as Iron Patriot (complete with new paint job) and is tasked with finding the Mandarin.  However, when the Mandarin finally hits Stark close to home, Stark threatens revenge on the Mandarin.

There are issues I had here and there, but in the interest of keeping things spoiler-free, I'll hold back on any specific criticism.  A friend and I were discussing IM3 right after seeing it, and we both felt that many of our complaints were nitpicks.  I think you'll understand what I'm talking about when you see the film.  I'll just say this, if I can accept the premise that a super-genius is flying around in a self-made, robotic suit, with a glowing power source implanted in his chest, then I can accept some of the things that bothered me a little in IM3.  They even made a joke about this in the film saying something along the lines of 'everything changed once the big guy with the hammer landed.'  So yeah, in a universe that has Hulk and Thor, I can look past some stuff.  It's the whole Flying Snowman thing.

The one complaint I can talk about is the ending.  Don't get me wrong, it's action packed and a blast to watch for sure, but there's such an orgy of Iron Man suits that at times you really can't tell who is fighting whom.  There's just a little too much going on, but this is just the kind of stuff that will likely get multiple viewings out of fans, and people breaking down these scenes in slow motion in order to catch everything.  I'll admit that I'm going to be one of these people.  Do you see what I'm saying about the complaint being a bit of a nitpick?  I'm complaining that that super entertaining and explosive conclusion had too much going on.

There are several entertaining action scenes in the film, and despite being over two hours, the film is briskly paced and there's never a dull moment.

As you'd hope, the effects are great!  I love these small, independent films that do what they can with a modest budget.  I saw this on IMAX 3D, and maybe I sat too close to the screen, but I could barely even tell the film was in 3D.  It's still worth seeing in a premium format for the overall look of the film and the sound, but I didn't anything out of the 3D.

Besides the action sequences, another strength is the humor.  As I hoped with bringing in Shane Black, his pairing with RDJ would net us some great, Lethal Weapon-like dialog, and that's exactly what we got.  It's a little mean-spirited at times, but that's part of Tony Stark's character.  It's definitely a contrast from Iron Man 2, where I felt everyone was just smarmy and snarky.  This time it's pretty much contained to Stark, and the overall level of the dialog in an improvement across the board.  Shane Black, along with co-writer Drew Pearce, really know how to write snappy, witty dialog, and Black knows how to get the best out of everyone.  There honestly isn't a weak link in the entire cast, and the chemistry is great with everyone.

Robert Downey Jr. was great as Tony Stark again.  Back when originally cast for Iron Man, I thought it was a perfect casting based on his life experiences.  It's a little interesting to note that he worked with Black on Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, which many feel was the movie that really got RDJ back on the path to superstardom (check KKBB out if you haven't seen it).  RDJs contract is up with IM3, so I don't know if this is the last for him and Iron Man, but I really hope it's not.  I've heard RDJ is willing to extend his contract and said he has a few more in him, so hopefully they can keep this going for at least another Avengers and IM flick.  If something doesn't happen though, then at least he's going out on a high note.

Iron Man 3 is a great addition to the Iron Man franchise and picks up from the high note left off by The Avengers.  There are lots of great action scenes, and funny dialog, so whether you're a fan of Iron Man, Robert Downey Jr., or just Summer blockbusters, then you're sure to be entertained.  Don't miss this one, true believers!

4 (out of 5) Death Stars