Taken 2

½ pipe out of 4

Sometimes sequels don’t need to be made and when it comes to Taken 2, this is a definitely the case. When a movie like the original Taken sits on the movie company shelf for 2 years before being released, you can tell it’s not movie gold. That is what happened with Taken but it was released at the perfect time when there were no other action films in theaters and it did huge. You’d think that the movie company would count this as a win and move on. Oh no, not in this day and age. Any time movie companies see dollar signs they immediately think sequel, even if those dollar signs were just dumb luck. Don’t get me wrong; I loved Taken just as much as the next guy but Taken 2 is a whole other story. The movie looses all of the emotional edge from the first film and it looks like Liam Neeson has done this all before, which he has, and simply goes down a checklist of what to do when your wife and daughter are kidnapped. Throw in a number of other inconsistencies and the fact the Neeson rescues his family in less than 12 hours make this a forgettable movie.

Wreck-It-Ralph

2 ½ pipes out of 4

Wreck it Ralph needs no fixing, being a funny movie for both kids and adults. Aiming at the kids are all the cute interactions and characters, such as Vanellope (Sarah Silverman) and Fix-it-Felix (Jack McBrayer). To the adult crowed the movie appeals to the retro gamer in all of us, reminding us of our childhood and the games we used to play. The story follows Wreck-It-Ralph who is tired of being viewed as a bad guy just because he plays a bad guy in his game. He sets out on an adventure to find a medal in order to become a good guy. High jinks ensue and he ends up running into an annoying young girl named Vanellope and they learn they may be able to help each other. There are tons of retro game cameos and adult humor thinly veiled enough to avoid child detection. A few unnecessary slap stick gags bring Ralph lower but he manages to wreck all expectations, giving you a darn good show. 

Skyfall

1 pipe out of 4

Skyfall falls flat. Note to MGM studios, the makers of James Bond, when you are making a prequel series of the greatest MI6 agent of all time, remember that things are happening before the 30 odd other Bond films. So to have in your chronologically 3^rd Bond movie, a burnt out James Bond does not make any sense. You are supposed to be showing us how Bond became a BA. You did this adequately in Casino Royal and got worse in Quantum of Solace but still okay, in Skyfall you are downright awful. To supposedly start Bond off as an old burnt out agent DOESN'T WORK! Daniel Craig may be 44 and can look his age when he isn’t cleaned up but through the magic of cleaning and a little bit of makeup he looks like he could honestly be in his late 20’s or early 30’s. USE THIS! Don’t give him the problems of an old washed out spy when he needs to be the epitome of awesome. Another thing that I am starting to get sick of in Bond films is the complete disregard and degradation of women. I understand that Bond is a womanizer and with that comes a certain amount of disgrace but simply to kill them off to get them out of the movie is starting to get really old. We are in the 21^st century for goodness sake; I think we can do better. The one bright spot of the film was the acting of Javier Bardem who plays the rogue MI6 agent that has a vendetta against M (Judi Dench). His playful yet sinister attitude and brilliant planning make him wish he had more screen time especially since he isn’t introduced to the film until nearly half way through. Bardem’s masterful work and everyone else’s lackluster performances actually get you to start rooting for the villain and completely understanding why his is doing the vile things he has done. The attempted back-story into Bond’s Childhood asks more questions than it answers and leads to the anticlimactic reveal of the meaning of Skyfall, leaving a sour taste in your mouth. This Bond film is well worth the wait for Red Box.

Total Recall

½ pipe out of 4

Schwarzenegger out acting someone? Inconceivable right? Wrong. Colin Farrell is the man selected to modernize Arnold’s iconic role and does a horrible job. It did not help that he had an absolutely atrocious script to work with but it is his job to recognize good and bad scripts and he found a bad one. Jessica Biel continues her downward spiral of movie making by playing Farrell’s love rebel love interest while Kate Beckinsale makes a poor career choice by portraying Farrell’s wife. Len Wiseman of Underworld and Live free or Die Hard fame chose to direct the Total Recall remake while Kurt Wimmer of The Recruit and Equilibrium fame chose to write. Wimmer and Wiseman eliminated many iconic scenes for attempted modernization which did not add anything to the film he also removed a huge plot point only to replace it with a mashed up confusing alternative. Instead of a colony on Mars, there is a colony on earth that is one of two places on the earth that is inhabitable after nuclear war. Klatu (Bill Nighy) is no longer a mutant fighting for equality and freedom for mutants but just independence from the United Federation of Britain. Brian Cranston plays the evil Prime Minister who wants to destroy all the inhabitants in the colony for no discernible reason and wished to do so with synthetic robot guards, instead of the regular military. With this decision to eliminate a good portion of the plot of the original Total Recall, Wimmer appeared to create a list of things that are required to be in a Total Recall remake such as the three breasted prostitute, reference to divorce between Beckinsale and Farrell’s character. He subsequently proceeded to check them of in no discernible order. In the beginning of the film it appears to have promise with the new direction that the director chose to go but he was limited to be unable to divert to far of the original. With these limitations, Wimmer and Wiseman sink the remake into the nuclear wasteland that they created.

The Bourne Legacy

1½ Pipes out of 4

The action remains but the heart is gone. With Matt Damon removed from the Bourne series the logic and investment held by the audience has disappeared as well. Jeremy Renner attempts to continue the franchise made famous by Damon and puts forth a good effort but is not given a whole lot to work with plot wise. Renner is in the difficult part of his career where he has been pigeon holed and type casted as the next action star so was the logical choice for Damon’s replacement. This is a problem when the Bourne films have developed into more than just action films but acting and action films. It also does not help that the audience has built an emotional attachment to Jason Bourne only to have a fourth film that has almost nothing to do with him. There is the occasional reference to Bourne as being in New York with a news clip about his exploits but little more than that. For the most part of the film the audience is following the exploits of Aaron Cross, a bioengineered super soldier who is betrayed by his government. He then must go and rescue a doctor (Rachel Weisz) who has been overseeing his bioengineering who coincidentally has also been betrayed by the government. This then leads to the main plot of the film which actually appeared to be a sub plot but turned into the main which leaves the viewer incredibly disappointed at the end of the film because they were expecting more. The rest of the film follows a government official (Edward Norton) who is never really explained, only that he has top security clearance and he is in charge of the numerous programs spawned from Treadstone and Blackbriar. He is attempting to clean up the mess left by Jason and that means killing both Renner and Wiesz’s characters. The writer and director Tony Gilroy who also wrote the previous 3 Bourne films stated he likes that being the director means he gets to do the film his way but maybe he needed that input to make the movies good because  The Bourne Legacy doesn’t even come close to the other three films.

Lawless

1 pipe out of 4

Great acting cannot save this bland and drawn out plot. Even with the stand out performance of Guy Peirce and steadfast acting of Tom Hardy could not save this movie from being unrelatable and ordinary. The movie follows the Bondurant brothers who are bootleggers in Franklin County, Virginia. The county is subsequently taken over by a corrupt district attorney who hires a ruthless mercenary (Guy Peirce) to bring all the Bootleggers under his thumb. Naturally the Bondurant brothers refuse and a “war” if you can even call it that begins between the two parties. There are continual teasers throughout the film of a confrontation between the two but is constantly differed to later. There are minor scrimmages that defiantly warrant the R rating that the film received but nothing like were indicated with the advertising. It appears that they tried to pull in the action movie viewers only to try and give them a drama action film that has questionable acting other than Pierce and Hardy. Shia Labouf is supposed to play the relatable character that is searching for equality and respect from his older brothers but fails miserably in that regard. He constantly is making stupid decisions and never owning up to the consequences. When he and his brothers gain wealth by becoming rum runners into Chicago he goes around flaunting his wealth with new cars, new clothes and new cameras trying to impress the daughter of an Amish preacher (Mia Wasikowska). This is just typical Labouf in his pretentious, overeager jerk that he is reprising from almost all of his films. There is the small highlight of Dane DeHaan who plays the crippled boy who the Bondurant have basically adopted and is the maker of the moonshine. He is delightfully upbeat and innocent which is refreshing from all the dark and dreary characters that litter this film.

The Expendables 2

1½ pipes out of 4

A sequel better than the original? Is that even possible? When it comes to The Expendables and The Expendables 2, it is definitely the case. With Sylvester Stallone staying in front of the camera as Barney Ross and not behind it, The Expendables 2 manages to have a somewhat decent plot as well as amazing action. The introductory fight scene, introduction of the newest member of the group Billy (Liam Hemsworth) and fellow mercenary Trench (Arnold Schwarzenegger) leaves something to be desired with plenty of blood, guts and gore. It is kind of disheartening when it is obvious that it has been CGI’d. What happened to the good old days when you could see a gun fight with fake blood instead of computer graphics, and you would think that it might even be a little cheaper. As the film progresses, the plot gets better as instead of CIA agent Church (Bruce Willis) hiring a group of mercenaries to perform a coup in a foreign country, he asks them to perform an extraction mission of highly sensitive material. Of course this material is stolen by villain Vilain (Jean-Claude Van Damme) and subsequent hatred is created between Stallone and Van Damme. For the mission a female is added to the team (Nan Yu) and when it all falls apart begins to kindle a relationship with Stallone creating the sub-plot of whether Barney can ever love without getting the people he loves killed. Chuck Norris makes his return to film stacking the cast to the point of toppling. It is interesting that with Norris being known as the complete BAMF of all action stars, the film actually portrays this persona in order to appease the audience even going so far as to including a Chuck Norris joke. The Expendables 2 manages to increase the comedy and action to ramp up this sequel to give it one a satisfactory feeling when leaving the film. This is definitely not the acting action film of old like Saving Private Ryan, The Dark Knight or even The Avengers but this is what you go to in order to reminisce about the good old days of the action heroes.  

Moonrise Kingdom

3 pipes out of 4

The hidden kingdom of Moonrise has been found by millions of audiences and is easily the dark horse movie of the summer. Wes Anderson combines an all star cast of Bill Murray, Bruce Willis, Edward Norton and Frances McDormand to introduce Kara Hayward and Jared Gilman, the title characters who are the stereotypical oddballs who don’t fit in with their families.  The film is the epitome of cheesy which makes it all the more amazing. Instead of unintentional cheesy, the director takes every opportunity available to cheesify the film, such as most of the sets look as if they are on a stage. There is no attempt to make the film look like real life and actually goes through effort to remove the realness for instance calling Tilda Swinton’s character Social Services and no actual name. Through the use of awkward situations and interactions between characters and the stiff portrayal of the two children Suzy and Sam brings comedy throughout the film. With the introduction of Kara Hayward and Jared Gilman only Kara showed range and the ability to possibly expand on her career but both fulfill their roles for the film masterfully. Moonrise is not the movie for everyone, action is scarce and Jared Gilman develops his characters through lengthy dialogue and somewhat confusing flashbacks. Anderson often reverses the roles of the adults with the children giving the youth adult characteristics and the adults’ youthful stupidity. 

The Dark Knight Rises

2½ pipes out of 4 

All good things must come to an end and so it has with Christopher Nolan’s Batman Trilogy. In the final installment The Dark Knight Rises, Nolan manages to send the audience off with a style by tricking the audience into believing they know most of the plot through the trailers, only to find themselves glued to the edge of their seats with surprise cameos, plot twists and unexpected character development.  Throughout the Dark Knight trilogy, Nolan has done a masterful job of leaving little tidbits of comic lore for the diehard Batman fan but also holds enough intrigue for those who do not follow the comics. The Dark Knight Rises eloquently raps up the Batman story of Nolan’s trilogy with only a few mistakes. Nolan’s 2008 Dark Knight can easily be considered the greatest comic book movie of all time and brought legitimacy to the comic book movie industry. To follow up the Dark Knight with something as good or even better would be nothing short of a miracle and that is why Nolan doesn’t even try. He keeps the legitimacy of the Dark Knight trilogy but changes from telling the gritty story with masterful acting to throwing in curveballs that the audience doesn’t see coming. He also diverts everyone’s attention from the fact that Bane is no Joker with an intriguing back story with the League of Shadows from Batman Begins. Surprisingly Anne Hathaway manages to perform well as a troubled Catwoman debating her own morality. One of the most interesting aspects of the Dark Knight Rises is that it not necessary for the audience to view its predecessors in order to enjoy the film. There are a few aspects that undercut the plot causing for criticism, one being that in order to hold the plot together Nolan throws in too many characters without enough time to develop them properly. The two or three characters that Nolan chooses to develop he does well but leaves a number of others undeveloped. There were logistical issues that were swept under the rug with the audience expected to forget about but tend to be big enough to notice with ease. None of these issues damage the movie enough to make it not entertaining and well worth the price of admission.