Grandma (2015)

I guess calling it "Bad Grandma" would have been a little too obvious, and just a bit hackish. Actually, I wouldn't call her bad as much as I would call her surly. I'm sure we all know the cranky, outspoken grandparent, only it's funny to watch when they aren't yours. I'm already surly and cranky now, so I can only imagine how I'll be 30 years from now. There's a part of me that looks forward to the day when I stop giving a shit and just say whatever the hell I want.

Grandma is a good example of limited story telling. The film plays out over just a single day, but you get everything you need to know from the dialog and interaction. They don't waste time with pointless exposition or explaining all the relationships. It's all there on the screen if you pay attention (and it's not like it's hard to figure out). Depending on your political or religious views, the ultimate goal of this film might upset some of you, but I didn't have an issue with it. I wouldn't get hung up on that though, as the movie is funny and light.

Despite being a limited story, they don't rush things and the relatively short running time is tight and effective. It's refreshing to see a movie that doesn't pad it's runtime. Just put what what needs to be in the film, and if it ends up being just 88 minutes, then so be it. I wish more filmmakers would realize this. Grandma is the kind of movie where at the end, I wouldn't have minded seeing another ten minutes or so. I enjoyed watching the characters and how it all played out.

Lily Tomlin is great, and I'm already hearing Oscar buzz around her performance. I almost forgot we are approaching Oscar-bait season, but this isn't as in your face as maybe other offerings around this time of the year are. Tomlin really is fun to watch, and not just because of her general attitude. There's a wisdom there, but doesn't hammer you over the head with it. I also enjoyed an engaging performance from Julia Garner. She's a relative newcomer, but she has such a distinctive look that she's hard not to notice even in limited screentime. I can see her becoming the next indie queen and seems a likely candidate for playing the manic pixie dream girl type. Marcia Gay Harden is also great. They do an interesting thing with her character where they build her up, and you think she's going to be someone you're going to hate, but when you're finally introduced to her, she comes off as the most sympathetic and relatable. In a weaker movie she would have been a caricature of an overbearing mother. All of the characters in Grandma are more complex than on the surface and aren't perfect people. You know, like in reality.

Grandma is a funny, well-written and heartfelt character story that's driven by an Oscar worthy performance from Lily Tomlin. Since this is smaller release, most won't be able to see this in the theaters, but it's definitely worth checking out.

4 (out of 5) Death Stars

Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)

What are Star Wars and Star Trek fans gonna argue about now that the franchises share the same director?  Can you just imagine how it would go?

"The last Star Trek movie had superior direction than Episode VII.  Ugh, and those lense flares on the lightsabers!  Are you kidding me?"

"Um...weren't they directed by the same guy?"

"Oh yeah..."

J.J. Abrams, uniting geeks since 2015.

It's really weirding me out that there's no colon in the title of Star Trek Into Darkness.  Shouldn't there be a colon between Star Trek and Into Darkness?  Otherwise, isn't the title saying that they are taking a trek, based in the stars, into darkness.  And what kind or darkness?  Space is dark, or do they mean darkness as in emotional tone?  I don't know why I'm hung up on that.

If you've been following my blog at all, or just look at my online name, it won't be a surprise to you that I'm not a huge Trekkie.  I didn't get into Trek until The Next Generation, which I loved.  I've also watched a fair amount of the more recent shows like Voyager, Deep Space Nine, and Enterprise, but I never really got into the Original Series.  Even the films featuring the original crew I've only seen once or twice each.  I understood the characters and the relationships, but I always felt like the Original Series and crew was a little before my time.

I was one of the guys that embraced the reboot and changes made in 2009's Star Trek.  I thought it was a good way to introduce Star Trek to the mainstream and a new generation, while still showing some respect to the Original Series.  In some ways I enjoyed Into Darkness even more than the previous film.  I didn't have to spend any time accepting a new cast or wrapping my head around the fact that it's set in an alternate timeline.  I was able to just sit back and enjoy the movie for what it is, and for most of the film that worked for me.  However, many things happen in the second half that really detracted from the film, and not just from a Star Trek perspective, but from a general storytelling one.

I can't really get into the plot too much without spoilers, but I will say that if you've been following the rumors about what Into Darkness was going to be about, I can say that much of what I heard was true, to varying degrees.

Everyone is back for another adventure.  This time the crew is responsible for tracking down a terrorist that has committed several attacks against the Federation.  This terrorist is a rogue Starfleet member named John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch).  He's retreated to Kronos, the Klingon homeworld.  Admiral Marcus (Peter Weller) tasks Kirk (Chris Pine) and the Enterprise to hunt him down, even though this may risk full on war with the Klingons.  This manhunt, as well as travelling so close to Klingon territory isn't something that sits well with several members of the crew.

Without revealing anything, they do a twist on a familiar Trek story, but I felt that many of these elements were totally forced.  Even if you weren't aware of any internet rumors or spoilers, the film has few surprises.  This will be especially true if you're familiar with the previous Star Trek film Into Darkness mostly references.

Another thing that really bugged me about the story is that they setup a climax that's supposed to have all this emotional significance, but a previous scene in the film has already let you know that what you're watching is not going to have any real consequence.  Knowing this takes all the impact out of it, and you could feel that the audience wasn't really affected by this either.  They should have been moved by it.  Another twist in the film is spoiled simply by having Peter Weller playing the role.  This isn't Weller's fault, but he's become one of those actors that when you see him in a role, you kind of have him pegged.  I didn't find these things plot holes (there are a few though), as much as just telegraphed storytelling.  It doesn't completely ruin the movie for me, but the more I think about certain plot elements, the more they bug me.

Plus, with shoehorning these familiar Trek elements into it, it takes away from this being original.  Why go through the trouble of rebooting Star Trek and going in a different direction if you're just going to spend a good portion of your second movie doing fan-service to previous stories?  The sad part is that until we get about halfway through the film, it still felt like it was going for something original.

Even though the story was a bit of a disappointment, I wasn't disappointed at all with the look of the film or the action.  J.J. Abrams certainly knows how to make an action packed film that's filled with great effects and is never boring to look at.  There are some great sequences throughout the film and it doesn't let up for a minute.  People have joked for a while that when he made Star Trek he really just made a Star Wars film, and now it's clear that he really is ideally suited for Episode VII.  I can't wait to see what he does with it now.

Seriously, this is only a slight exaggeration this time around.

The 3D is actually good for a change.  I saw this in RPX and this is an example of where I thought it enhanced my enjoyment of the film.  I just heard that 30 minutes of this was shot in IMAX, so even though I didn't see it in IMAX, I'd recommend seeing it in that format if it's available to you.  Oh yeah, this movie's got lense flares galore.

Another strength is that it does have some very funny dialog.  The cast still has great chemistry, and that's holding these films together.  I was a little surprised by how much people say "shit" in the future though.  You'd think we would have phased that out by then.

While in the last film, I thought Uhura (Zoe Saldana), Sulu (John Cho), Chekov (Anton Yelchin), and especially Bones (Karl Urban) had their moments, I felt like this time the real standouts were Scotty (Simon Pegg) and Spock (Zachary Quinto).  Simon Pegg in particular is a total scene stealer.  I also enjoyed Benedict Cumberbatch's performance even though there were many things about his character that bugged me.  I wasn't quite sold on Chris Pine this time around though.  While I really liked him in the first film, I had a harder time buying into some of the scenes where he was trying to be intense and angry.  I think some of this comes from how the characters were written though.  The motivations of both Kirk and Harrison weren't consistent for me.

As far as summer blockbusters go, there's a lot to like about Star Trek Into Darkness.  If you're a fan of the last Star Trek or sci-fi action in general, then it delivers on exactly what you're expecting.  However, if you're a Trekkie, your mileage may vary, especially in the third act where even a non-Trekkie like myself had issues with some of the forced plot elements.  Still though, it has great effects, tons of fast-paced action and enough funny moments to please those looking for a good time at the movies.

3.5 (out of 5) Death Stars

Identity Thief (2013) - Movie Review

The real thievery is the money the filmmakers try to take from your wallet.

As someone that's had his identity stolen at least three times and used for some kind of credit card fraud (that's not an exaggeration), I can tell you that it's certainly no fun to deal with.  I've been fortunate that every time it's been something I've been able to clear up with a few phone calls, and I've never once had to involve the authorities.  You'd be surprised at how much the stores, banks and credit card companies will take care of for you. Granted, I didn't have the same extremes and nightmare stories that some of you have heard about, or like what the 'fake' Sandy Bigelow Patterson (Melissa McCarthy) does here in Identity Thief.

Lots of spoilers ahead, but it's hard to spoil a film that's so predictable.

We aren't just talking about some fake credit cards and running up some charges either. She's getting arrested and making large purchases (like cars), too.  Meanwhile the real Sandy Patterson (Jason Bateman), is a hard working accountant, with a wife (Amanda Peet), two cute kids (real-life sisters Mary-Charles and Maggie Elizabeth Jones), and a baby on the way.  He has a horrible boss (Jon Favreau), but gets some good news when a co-worker (John Cho) offers him a fat new job at a new company he's starting.  The good news is short-lived though, as the Denver authorities (led by Morris Chestnut) inform him that he's under investigation for fraud and skipping out on court dates in Florida.

Identity Thief already takes a bad turn at this point with this contrived, implausible setup.  Even though they pull the mug shot, and see that it's clearly not him that's committed these crimes, he's still under investigation.  Also, for some reason, his boss says he has to fire him unless he can clear up the charges.  Again, remember it's clear to everyone at this point that the 'real' Sandy Patterson is not the one that did these things.  'Real' Sandy is aware of 'fake' Sandy's whereabouts, but the Denver police say there's nothing they can do, which is absolutely not true in reality.  They also say they can't even call the Winter Park, Florida authorities to pick her up (also totally not true).  Huh?  So, 'real' Sandy says he'll fly down to Florida, pick up the 'fake' Sandy and bring her back to Denver.  The cops actually agree this is a good idea.  What?  Yes, send an accountant to act as a bounty hunter.  Makes perfect sense, right?

What's funny about the how the little the police are able to do here, is that later in the film, the Sandy's are forced to steal another person's identity (but it's okay because it's an asshole, one-percenter, so he deserves it), as part of their bonding adventures. Yet, just a few hours later the St. Louis police are arresting them for fraud.  So, the Denver and Winter Park police can't do anything despite multiple offenses, but the St. Louis police are on them after just one?  Is Identity Thief saying that the St. Louis police are just that much better, or were they so quick to respond because this time the stole from a one-percenter? Wait a second, I'm giving the film way too much credit for trying to say something.

A lot of times I talk about shutting off your brain and just enjoying a film, but Identity Thief is the type of film where the filmmakers have to assume your brain is already shut off to accept anything that happens.  The movie contradicts itself all over the place, and people don't react to things like normal people do.  This wouldn't have been so bad if the movie had actually been funny.  I was surprised at how few laughs there were.  If you've seen the trailer, then you've already seen every funny scene in the film, and they play out even less funny in the film.  If you've seen the trailer twice, then you've now laughed more times than you will when actually watching Identity Thief.  The humor is mean-spirited, one-note (how many times can you make the joke that Sandy is a 'girls name'), and much of it felt like bad improv.

One of the biggest fails of the movie is that they actually try to make Melissa McCarthy's character a likable person.  There's even a makeover scene where she walks into the room in slow motion and Jason Bateman is like, "Wow!"  Then, they make 'real' Sandy conflicted as to whether or not to still turn her in, and says she's not a bad person.  Sandy, can I talk to you for a second?  I can safely tell you that she is a terrible person.  She's a violent sociopath that ruins people's lives.  Are you already forgetting that her ruining of your life is why you're on this ridiculous adventure in the first place or that she's physically attacked you multiple times?  You've only been with her a few days, so you couldn't have possibly bonded that much.  Even taking the bonding out of the equation, do you really think she's reformed and truly remorseful after a just few days when she's clearly a career criminal with no conscience up to this point?

Did I mention yet that Identity Thief is almost two hours?  The length really hammers home how few genuine laughs there are. It could have easily been edited down to 90 minutes without difficulty due to all of the extraneous characters and subplots that didn't add anything to the story.  For example, you've got a duo of lousy hitmen (Genesis Rodriguez and T.I.) after 'fake' Sandy because of some fake credit cards she sold to a mobster, and now he's in jail.  It's interesting to note that this mobster is in jail because of her fake credit cards, but they can't seem to track down the 'elusive' Sandy for the same thing.  Plus, now her list of offences includes selling fake credit cards to the mob.  Then, there's a bounty hunter (Robert Patrick) after her that's portrayed as a bad guy, but he really isn't considering who he's after.  There's also a silly detour involving Sandy hooking up with a cowboy (Eric Stonestreet).  It's all supposed to add to the hi-jinx, but it just drags the movie down.  It's sad because I like the supporting cast, but removing all these extra characters and subplots might have actually helped you buy into 'fake' Sandy's redemption and their bonding on this road trip.

This time? YES!

Speaking of liking the cast.  I've always liked Jason Bateman, but once again he plays the same, ineffectual character that lets people walk over him and can't get shit done.  As the movie went on, I actually started to dislike his character more and more.  I just couldn't buy into the fact that he started to sympathize with her in any way.  While this felt like a vehicle for Melissa McCarthy to show off her comedy chops, I don't think she did herself any favors here either.  However, I do think both of these two will come out of this relatively unscathed since we all like them.  It's not even an issue with either of their performances, it's more that they wasted two talented people with a terrible script and poorly written characters.  Also, because I like Bateman and McCarthy so much, I kept trying to give the film a pass.  Then I thought, what if this film starred Katherine Heigl and Gerard Butler?  Would I be so forgiving then?

There's nothing original about Craig Mazin's screenplay, and the story itself is extremely predicable. The lack of originality and meanness of the script isn't a surprise since Mazin co-wrote on films like The Hangover Part II (which was basically the same story The Hangover with small substitutions), Scary Movie 3 and 4 and Superhero Movie.  So much is recycled that they use the same M.I.A. song twice in the movie. That same song that also appears in the trailer for the other Melissa McCarthy movie with Sandra Bullock coming out this summer (and that looks just as bad as this).  Anyway, I'm more surprised that Identity Thief was directed by Seth Gordon, who directed the much funnier Horrible Bosses, as well as several episodes of funny shows like Modern Family, The Office, Community and Parks and Recreation.  I don't understand how he didn't see that the comedy in this didn't measure up to other work he's done and how much of the story was so unnecessary.  He couldn't have brought in some of the Horrible Bosses writers to punch up the script or something?

It's early in the year, but Identity Thief has a lock on one of the worst films of 2013.  It wastes a talented cast with an implausible setup, predictable story, and lame, recycled humor.  It's dull and a real chore to watch, and I found myself growing angry with it the longer it dragged on.  I advise you to pass on Identity Thief, but I know that based on people involved some of you still want to see this.  If you really can't resist, please save it for rental.

1 (out of 5) Death Stars

Total Recall (2012) - Movie Review

Well, it's August already, so it's time to start dumping out the films that can't compete with the big boys of Summer.  I know that sounds a little harsh, but we're starting the month with a totally unnecessary remake of a film that many of you already own on DVD.  I guess you could say there are spoilers here, if you haven't seen the original.  Otherwise, nothing that happens in this new Total Recall is going to surprise you.  In fact they seem to reference the original movie constantly to the point where you're like, "Why don't I just watch the original instead?"

If you're totally unfamiliar with the story, Colin Farrell takes over for former Governator Arnold Schwarzenegger as Doug Quaid.  Quaid is a factory worker married to Lori (Kate Beckinsale), and has a very basic life.  However, he continues to have nightmares and can't shake the feeling that he's meant for something else.  He decides to go to Rekall, a place were you can get memories implanted to experience different things.  He chooses to have memories about being a spy, but before anything happens, a SWAT team bursts in and Quaid manages to kill them all.  He returns home to find Lori isn't actually his wife and reveals that he actually is a spy.  Then he goes on a series of chases, eventually joined by a resistance member (Jessica Biel), who tries to help him stop the evil Cohaagen (Bryan Cranston) and foil his plan.  Cohaagen's evil plan involves creating an army of the robots from I, Robot to take over.

Both this and the original were based on a Philip K. Dick short story "We Can Remember It for You Wholesale".  Initially, we were promised a more faithful adaptation to the original story, but what we got here was just a remake of the original film with a few slight changes.  Gone in this version are the references to Mars.  Instead we're introduced to a world ravaged by war, where there are only two habitable areas left on opposite sides of the planet.  To travel between the two, they've built a giant train that travels through the core of the Earth.  You can try and wrap your head around that one, but this is Summer film, so if I can buy in to the premise of a colony and travel to Mars, I guess I have to accept a giant elevator travelling through the planet.  Although, travelling to Mars seems like the more realistic scenario these days.

Unfortunately, I just don't have all that much to say about Total Recall.  I saw the same movie 20 years ago, and I still have a fondness for it.  It didn't need a remake.  Sure, the original was silly and it doesn't hold up great, but it had one crucial thing that was missing here: fun.  This remake is just too serious and dark.  Plus, it's missing all of the mind games I felt the original had, but maybe that's due to the fact that I'm too familiar with the story.

The cast is fine, but it seemed like everyone was just going through the motions, and I just wasn't all that interested in any of the characters.  There's never any suspense or a moment where you think that Quaid is in any real danger.  I think part of the problem is that in an action film like this, you need someone with the presence of Schwarzenegger.  It's not that Colin Farrell did a bad job, he's clearly a better actor, but I just didn't get the same feeling from the character that I needed to truly be invested in the story.  It's a shame they get people like Jessica Biel and Bryan Cranston to be in this and just don't give them that much to do.  I think Kate Beckinsale was probably the highlight for me, as she has most of the best scenes, but this shouldn't really be a surprise as she's married to the director.

Director, and Fremont native, Len Wiseman (nice shout out during the movie to my home town) did a decent job.  From his previous films like Underworld and Live Free or Die Hard, he seems to do well directing action and big action sequences, which are the best parts of the film.  He just didn't do enough with the story, and instead filled it with tons of action sequences, which to be honest, started to get kind of boring and repetitive as the movie wore on.  I felt like the movie lost steam about halfway through.

The effects were pretty good though and it's a nice looking film.  You can see where they spent most of this films budget.  However, there were some times, especially when they did wider shots of the city, where I thought some of the details looked really bad.  Like it needed just a little more polish.

I guess it's kind of ironic that a movie with recall in the title reminded me of so may other films.  You'll watch this and be reminded of stuff like I, Robot, Minority Report, Blade Runner, and even The Core.  They are all just mashed up together.

As a standalone action film, Total Recall isn't terrible, but if you've seen the original, there's nothing here that you haven't already seen before.  Watching it feels like playing a familiar video game, just with different graphics and skins.  It's a rental.

2.5 (out of 5) Death Stars

American Reunion (2012) - Movie Review

Having just had my high school reunion last summer, I can attest to how fun it can be to reunite with everyone and catch up.  I think that made me look forward to American Reunion to see the gang back together.  Unfortunately, I had more fun at my own reunion than watching this movie.

The title pretty much tells you the entire premise.  It's time for their reunion, their 13-year reunion.  Why 13?  I have no idea.  They make reference early in the movie that there was a recent reunion they didn't attend, like their 10-year reunion perhaps?  Why not just fib a little and make it the 15 year reunion?  Sure, it's been 13 years since the first American Pie, but is accuracy really the most important thing here?

They do manage to get the entire cast back together, but that seems like more of a reflection of the fact that none of these guys had much else going on.  It's kind of ironic that the biggest current star from the original cast, John Cho ("MILF!"), was only a bit part in the first movie.  Throughout the film they will randomly throw in a character from the series.  Towards the end, when certain characters show up, it felt more like they were just trying to fill a quota.  Like a teacher doing roll call and making sure everyone is in attendance.

There's not much to the plot either; they reunite, drink and party, and move from one awkward situation to the next.  Here's the biggest problem: when American Pie came out in 1999, it was a fresh and fun take on raunchy teen comedies.  The material, and sadly many of the actors, hasn't aged well.  Also, you have many more people out there that are doing much better versions this genre to compare it against.  You really have to have good material and unfortunately, this doesn't deliver.  There some some mildly amusing things here and there, but the movie barely got more than a chuckle out of me or seemingly anyone else in the theater.  There's nothing new here and you've seen it all before.  As with the previous films, the highlights are when Stifler (Seann William Scott) or Jim's Dad (Eugene Levy) are on screen.

When the movie is nearly two hours long, the lack of comedy really starts to wear on you.  It tries to be a little more poignant and thoughtful towards the end, but it didn't seemed earned.  This is due in large part to a pet peeve I have about movies where a misunderstanding occurs and it's something that could be cleared up with just a line of dialog or simple conversation.  Instead, someone storms off without listening to what the other person has to say.  It's a lazy way to have conflict in your movies.

It doesn't help that writer Adam Herz, from the first three films, is not back this time. Reunion was written and directed by Jon Hurwitz and Hayden Schlossberg, who already haven't impressed me with their work on the Harold and Kumar series.  In the hands of a better writing team, this could have been so much more.  Hurwitz and Schlossberg are capable of writing funny things, but it seems like they miss more than they hit.  Perhaps these guys would work better writing shorter sketches.

While you don't watch an American Pie movie expecting great acting, seeing all these guys back together really makes you aware at how bad some of them are, and why you haven't seen them much outside of this series.  Chris Klein really is a terrible actor.  This isn't a surprise to anyone that's seen his recent movies, but when you stand out as the worst actor even among this group (Mena Suvari, Tara Reid, Alyson Hannigan), then it's really bad.  These guys make Jason Biggs look like a capable actor.

It felt like the real star here is Ali Cobrin, who plays the girl next door that Jim used to babysit.  Without spoiling too much, she shows off her assets in a part of the film that will be sure to please most every guy watching the movie.

American Reunion is like going for that last piece of Pie when you're already full.  It's a little cold and tough to get down, but still tastes okay.  It was nice seeing the gang back together, but it would have been better to see them in a funnier movie.  I always say stuff like this, Reunion is not awful, but it could have been so much more.  I'm just disappointed.  If you're a fan of the series, you'll get some entertainment out of this latest installment, but even then I still think it's better suited as a rental.

2.5 (out of 5) Death Stars