14 Most Anticipated Movies of 2014

Okay, so I realize that 2014 is two months old already, but, I'm currently in-between ideas for posts. Also, each of the movies I have listed here isn't even out yet, so that's another reason to make this list. Plus, I'm fairly certain I have a bad obsession with list-making.

Anyway, remember when I said I didn't think the quality of movies was that great in 2013 (if you don't, you can totally read that statement here)? Well, I think 2014 has the potential to be one of the best years for movies in a long, long time. I'm not just talking about blockbuster movies either. There's a lot of potential in Oscar bait movies, book adaptations, comedies, everything. Remember when I said it took me all of 20 minutes to list my favorite movies of 2013 (seriously? Did you not read my last post? What do you do with your day? *sigh*),  I think I'm still not satisfied with the movies I've left off this list. So, besides the 14 movies that I painstakingly narrowed this list down to, I'm going to list probably another 10-15 movies that have caught my attention.

The whole point of me making this post is to not only highlight some movies that you may not know about, but to also get you even more excited about the movies you do know about, and, hopefully,I'll revisit this list at the end of the year to see if they lived up to the hype I have for them.

So, to get started, here's a list of movies I'm excited for in 2014 that aren't on the main list: Birdman, Serena, Cyber, A Most Wanted Man, Men Women & Children, Neighbors, Muppets Most Wanted, The Giver, Sin City: A Dame to Kill For, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, 22 Jump Street, Life Itself, Into the Woods. 

You should look up each of those movies if you have a chance. Some of them sound like great blockbusters, others could be Oscar bait, others just sound fun. The movies I've included below are a mix of summer fair, Oscar worthy, and some just for fun. For all the movies I list below, I'm including trailers where I can.

14. Guardians of the Galaxy - August 1

Synopsis: In the far reaches of space, an American pilot named Peter Quill finds himself the object of a manhunt after stealing an orb coveted by the villainous Ronan.

Why I'm Excited: This is easily the biggest risk Marvel has taken with their Cinematic Universe. It definitely looks fun, and Chris Pratt seems destined for super-stardom, but does the odd cast of characters make this a difficult sell to mainstream audiences? How vital will it be for the entire Marvel Universe as a whole? There are lots of question marks around it, but this trailer sure is well done.

13. Godzilla - May 16

Synopsis: A giant radioactive monster called Godzilla appears to wreak destruction on mankind.

Why I'm Excited: I will admit, I wasn't exactly thrilled for this reboot when I first heard about it being made. However, the director, Gareth Edwards, had a heck of a good monster movie with 2010's Monsters, so that definitely got me excited. Plus, the fact that the movie landed Ken Watanabe tells me the script has to be at least halfway decent, as Watanabe really doesn't do that many movies (he was last seen stateside in 2010's Inception). The new trailer just released is all kinds of awesome, which bumped it onto my list.

12. Transcendence - April 17

Synopsis: A terminally ill scientist downloads his mind into a computer. This grants him power beyond his wildest dreams, and soon he becomes unstoppable.

Why I'm Excited: Wally Pfister is best known as the cinematographer on movies like Moneyball, Inception, The Dark Knight trilogy, and The Prestige. It's quite an impressive list, and the one thing those movies (minus Moneyball) have in common? They're all directed by Christopher Nolan. Working with Nolan for that many movies had to rub off on Pfister in a good way, and Transcendence looks just as mind-bendy as some of Nolan's works. Here's hoping it's just as well done.

11. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 - May 2

Synopsis: Peter Parker runs the gauntlet as the mysterious company Oscorp sends up a slew of supervillains against him, impacting on his life.

Why I'm Excited: I wasn't exactly a huge fan of the first Amazing Spider-Man movie two years ago (check out my review), so why is the sequel on my list? Honestly, because of Spider-Man 2. I recently re-watched the first movie, and while I still have some problems with it, it's not as bad as I originally thought. However, it still mirrors the first Spider-Man movie far too much. In that instance, this one must be better because Spider-Man 2 is, I think, one of the best superhero movies ever. Probably a lame reason, but I don't care!

10. How to Train Your Dragon 2 - June 13

Synopsis: Five years after Hiccup and Toothless successfully united dragons and vikings on the island of Berk, the now inseparable pair journey through the skies, charting unmapped territories and exploring new worlds.

Why I'm Excited: First off, did you watch that trailer? Seriously, THAT folks, is how you make a teaser trailer for a sequel. I thought the first Dragon movie was really fun, and had that perfect, delicate balance of kids fare and adult humor to keep everyone happy. So, how do you do a sequel? You age the main character, just like the kids who fell in love with the first movie are now older. It's a great idea, in line with Toy Story 3. Let's hope it's just as good.

9. Captain America: The Winter Soldier - April 4

Synopsis: Steve Rogers struggles to embrace his role in the modern world and battles a new threat from old history: the Soviet agent known as the Winter Soldier.

Why I'm Excited: I realize I'm in the minority on this, but I think Captain America is the best of the Marvel movies not named The Avengers. The first movie was so much fun, and I think the idea of the sequel not only building on the success the character has had so far, but dive more into his struggles fitting into today's society, makes me think The Winter Soldier has a real solid chance of being the best Marvel movie to date.

8. Inherent Vice - December 12

Synopsis: In Los Angeles in 1970, drug-fueled detective Larry "Doc" Sportello investigates the disappearance of a former girlfriend.

Why I'm Excited: This movie makes this list by default simply because it's directed by Paul Thomas Anderson, the man who brought us the likes of Boogie Nights, There Will Be Blood, and The Master. Plus, I'm a sucker for a good crime story, and the novel, by Thomas Pynchon, is, from all accounts, just that. The December release has me thinking Oscar.

7. Foxcatcher - Late 2014

Synopsis: The story of Olympic Wrestling Champion Mark Schultz and how paranoid schizophrenic John duPont killed his brother, Olympic Champion Dave Schultz.

Why I'm Excited: The movie took sometime to make, and without a trailer I hesitated even putting it on the list, but it just sounds so good. Bennett Miller, director of Moneyball and Capote, is behind the camera here. Plus, the man in that photo with Channing Tatum? Steve Carrell, who plays the schizophrenic John duPont. This could really be something great.

6. Gone Girl - October 3

Synopsis: A woman mysteriously disappears on the day of her wedding anniversary. Based on the novel, "Gone Girl."

Why I'm Excited: Although I haven't finished the book yet (I personally think it's a slog to get through and I don't understand the hype), a movie that trims the novel's fat could be a great thing. David Fincher's last adaptation, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, as a big success despite the R rating. It'll be interesting to see how the movie handles the two narrative perspective, but I trust in Fincher. 

5. Noah - March 28

Synopsis: The Biblical Noah suffers visions of an apocalyptic deluge and takes measures to protect his family from the coming flood.

Why I'm Excited: Darren Aronofsky, the man who made the likes of Black Swan and The Wrestler, gets his biggest budget yet with Noah. Aronofsky has said in interviews he has always been fascinated by Noah, which would make this a dream project of sorts. The early release date has me somewhat worried about the movie's quality, but a new Aronofsky movie is a must-see. 

4. This is Where I Leave You - September 12

Synopsis: A Jewish family that isn't used to observing their faith's traditions is forced to fulfill their father's final wish and sit Shivah together for an entire week and confront their problems.

Why I'm Excited: The novel is one of my favorite books, and I always thought it would make a great movie. The cast is fantastic, with Jason Bateman and Tina Fey in the leads. There's also Connie Britton, Timothy Olyphant, Jane Fonda, and Rose Byrne. Another reason I'm excited is the novel's author, Jonathan Tropper, wrote the screenplay. I think the novel as it is would translate well to a movie, but having the author write the screenplay gives me hope it could be great.

3. X-Men: Days of Future Past - May 23

Synopsis: The X-Men send Wolverine to the past in a desperate effort to change history and prevent an event that results in doom for both humans and mutants.

Why I'm Excited: It's being billed as the ultimate X-Men movie, and with good reason. From the looks of the trailer, it's basically a bridge between the worlds established in the first three X-Men movies and First Class. Plus, it's apparently going to make it so X-Men: The Last Stand essentially never happened. If only we could do that in real life.

2. The Grand Budapest Hotel - March 7

Synopsis: The adventures of Gustave H, a legendary concierge at a famous European hotel between the wars, and Zero Moustafa, the lobby boy who becomes his most trusted friend.

Why I'm Excited: I became a Wes Anderson fan after 2012's Moonrise Kingdom, and Hotel looks ten times funnier. I really hope this isn't one of those cases where the trailer contains all the jokes, but I don't think that would be the case with a director as revered as Wes Anderson. The cast is full of stars, and I can't wait to see them all in the same movie.

1. Interstellar - November 7

Synopsis: A group of explorers make use of a newly discovered wormhole to surpass the limitations on human space travel and conquer the vast distances involved in an interstellar voyage.

Why I'm Excited: Two words: Christopher Nolan. He had a misstep with The Dark Knight Rises, but Nolan's best works have been the movies that challenge us on an intellectual level. Memento, The Prestige, and Inception were all mind benders in one way or another. Even though little to nothing is known about what the movie is actually going to be about, something tells me this could very well be Nolan's best movie yet. The November release places it as prime Oscar bait, and it doesn't hurt to have arguably the hottest actor in Hollywood (soon-to-be Oscar winner Matthew McConaughey) in the starring role.


Disclaimer: All of the synopses came from IMDb. I don't have that much free time!

My Favorite Movies of 2013

2013 was definitely one of my worst years for seeing new movies in a long time. Just look at how much I updated the blog and you'll have a good idea. It was a pretty busy year for me, but, luckily with some procrastination, I was able to see just about every movie I wanted to in time to make a top 10 list before the Oscars next Sunday.

Looking over my list of favorites, something occurred to me: this is a list my arrogant college self would have probably hated. There's definitely not as many art house type movies here, but I'm okay with that. While I love movies, and I'll never stop watching them or appreciating great ones, I've realized that movies I love don't have to be the indie darling. It can be that stupid comedy that gives you enough laughs that it starts to hurt after awhile. So, much like I said with last year's list, these are my favorite movies of the year, and no one else.

Although everyone is praising 2013 as an overall great year for movies, part of me disagrees with that. Many of the movies near the top of my list are great, great  movies, but there weren't all that many "pretty good" movies. I thought this summer was pretty disappointing for blockbusters. I loved Man of Steel, but was very meh on the likes of Iron Man 3 and Pacific Rim, both of which I was really looking forward to really enjoying. The Great Gatsby was also fairly disappointing, considering it was originally slated for December, 2012 as an Oscar hopeful. While Thor: The Dark World made up for Iron Man 3's disappointment, it still didn't do much to get me excited for Phase 2 of Marvel's Cinematic Universe.

Besides the comedies I have on my list, none of them really stood out this year. In short, I was pretty indifferent about most movies this year. I had a real easy time making my list this year, which told me even more about the quality of movies in 2013. In past years I had a hard time on which movies to place on my top 10, and even more so where they should be slotted. I'm almost certain it took me all of 20 minutes to complete my list. There were two movies I went back and forth on for number 10, but I finally decided on the movie that I kept coming back to.

I'll start my list just like every other year, with the seven that missed the cut. It's been seven movies since I started my "Best Of" lists, but this year, it could have been three movies and been just as fine. But, I'm OCD about this kind of stuff.

42

Written and Directed by Brian Helgeland
Produced by Thomas Tull

Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues

Directed by Adam McKay
Written by Will Ferrell and Adam McKay
Produced by Judd Apatow, Will Ferrell, and Adam McKay

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

Directed by Francis Lawrence
Written by Michael Arndt and Simon Beaufoy
Produced by Nina Jacobson and Jon Kilik

Man of Steel

Directed by Zack Snyder
Written by David S. Goyer
Produced by Christopher Nolan, Charles Roven, Deborah Snyder, and Emma Thomas

Nebraska

Directed by Alexander Payne
Written by Bob Nelson
Produced by Albert Berger and Ron Yerxa

Philomena

Directed by Stephen Frears
Written by Steve Coogan and Jeff Pope
Produced by Steve Coogan, Tracey Seaward, and Gabrielle Tana

Prisoners

Directed by Denis Villeneuve
Written by Aaron Guzikowski
Produced by Kira Davis, Broderick Johnson, Adam Kolbrenner, and Andrew A. Kosove

Those are seven very good movies that you should definitely watch when you can. However, they are inferior to the 10 listed below. So, let's get down to it.

10) Her

Written and Directed by Spike Jonze
Produced by Megan Ellison, Spike Jonze, and Vincent Landay

Her is definitely the most unique movie experience of 2013, and that is thanks in large part to writer/director Spike Jonze. It's a frightening look at a future that is all too close to becoming true. Much of the movie is Phoenix acting alone, and it reminds us just how great of an actor he can be. Chris Pratt has a great small role, and Amy Adams is as great as ever. The real high point of the movie, though is Scarlett Johansson. She's never on screen, yet her performance as the voice of the Operating System Samantha was the make or break role Obviously, she nails it, and I almost wish she would have had more support for an Oscar nomination.

9) This Is the End

Written and Directed by Evan Goldberg and Seth Rogen
Produced by Evan Goldberg, Seth Rogen, and James Weaver

It's offensive, rude, crude, weird, dumb, random, yet gut-busting hilarious. This Is The End is definitely NOT for the easily offended or very religious, but damn is this a funny movie. Each actor plays a hybrid version of themselves and what the public imagines them to be, and each of them nail it. No one has an issue making fun of themselves. The apocalyptic setting makes for some funny moments, but it's really the scenes of the actors just doing things that are the highlight.

8) Inside Llewyn Davis

Written and Directed by Ethan Coen and Joel Coen
Produced by Ethan Coen, Joel Coen, and Scott Rudin

The Coen Brothers are seemingly at their most comfortable with music movies. First it was O Brother, and now Llewyn Davis. I wouldn't say this movie surpasses O Brother in terms of quality, but it's obvious that the Coen Brothers just love to make these kind of movies. The "Please Mr. Kennedy" sequence has the perfect balance of being funny and fascinating that it couldn't have been filmed by anyone else. Justin Timberlake is quite terrific, and it's nice to see Oscar Isaac finally get a great starring role after so many secondary characters.

7) Captain Phillips

Directed by Paul Greengrass
Written by Billy Ray
Produced by Dana Brunetti, Michael De Luca, and Scott Rudin

Captain Phillips is the type of true story that was an almost no brainer to be made into a big budget Hollywood movie. The fact that it didn't get rushed to get made and has behind it one of the best actors of his time (Hanks) and a great director (Greengrass) says something immediately about the production value. The movie is not only nail bitingly intense, but also very much a character driven. The final moments, especially Hanks' acting, is arguably the best crowd pleasing moment of the year.

6)  Dallas Buyers Club

Directed by Jean-Marc Vallée
Written by Craig Borten and Melisa Wallack
Produced by Robbie Brenner and Rachel Winter

This is the type of movie where the acting performances take it from being a decent movie to one of the year's best. Although the story line gets a little too overcrowded by trying to say too much and tackle too many different issues, Dallas Buyers Club is one of the more enjoyable movies to watch, despite the grim story. Jared Leto is an absolute lock for Best Supporting Actor. McConaughey's physical transformation makes him very much the front runner for Best Actor. He has been on one hell of a run lately, and Buyers Club shows just how great of an actor he can be when given the proper role. 

5) Frozen

Directed by Chris Buck and Jennifer Lee
Written by Jennifer Lee
Produced by Peter Del Vecho

There was a time during the early 2000's that Disney was going through an identity crisis. If it wasn't for Pixar Studios creating amazing movies, Disney could have easily lost all of their movie credibility. Lately, the tide has changed. With movies like Wreck-It-Ralph and Tangled, Disney is starting to find the creative juice again. Frozen is the movie where Disney finally grows up, and realizes not every movie has to be about a knight in shining armor to be a good story. The animation is beautiful, and the music! Frozen is easily Disney's best animated feature since, probably, The Lion King (not counting Pixar movies). It also makes me excited about the future of Disney movies, which hasn't been the case since I really started getting into movies. 

4) 12 Years a Slave

Directed by Steve McQueen
Written by John Ridley
Produced by Dede Gardner,  Anthony Katagas, Jeremy Kleiner, Steve McQueen, and Brad Pitt

12 Years a Slave is without a doubt the most intense and difficult movie to watch of any on this list. Although I prefer Shame, Steve McQueen's third feature is easily his most emotionally moving and best crafted movie. He creates scenes that are filmed not in new ways, but different and more risk taking than perhaps other filmmakers would have done. There are a few scenes that I couldn't look away from despite how difficult the material is to watch, because of how amazingly well done they were filmed. It's the type of film that I will be thinking about for years, but I'm not sure if I'll ever be able to watch it again.  

3) American Hustle

Directed by David O. Russell
Written by Eric Warren Singer and David O. Russell
Produced by Megan Ellison, Jonathan Gordon, Charles Roven, and Richard Suckle

Despite the over two hour run time, American Hustle goes by in a flash. It's the type of movie that is simply great actors acting great together. The audience is the one that benefits the most. Despite the great performances from the entire cast, Jennifer Lawrence steals all her scenes with another amazing role. She should continue to stick with David O. Russell for future movies, as they could make some amazing work together.

2) The Wolf of Wall Street

Directed by Martin Scorsese
Written by Terence Winter
Produced by Riza Aziz, Leonardo DiCaprio, Joey McFarland, Martin Scorsese, and  Emma Tillinger Koskoff

Many people hate The Wolf of Wall Street because they think it glorifies the scumbags on screen. In fact, it does the complete opposite. DiCaprio's Jordan Belfort is not a character we root for, yet we are so completely fascinated with his lifestyle that we can't help but hope that we could at least have a little taste at it one day. In that sense, the people that loathe this movie are the ones afraid to admit they would trade places, if only for a day. The final scene so perfectly encapsulates that idea, and society's thoughts on this lifestyle in general.

1) Gravity

Directed by Alfonso Cuarón
Written by Alfonso Cuarón and Jonás Cuarón
Produced by Alfonso Cuarón and David Heyman

Similarly to when I first saw Argo in 2012, I knew almost instantly Gravity was my favorite movie of 2013. I haven't seen anything quite like Gravity in a long time, in terms of story, acting, cinematography, and overall direction. It is a unique experience, and nothing even comes close to how great it is. The story sometimes muddles for too long, but the amount of amazing moments (that opening long take!) more than make up for any issues I have with the story. I constantly found myself comparing everything I saw to Gravity after the first viewing. It's a great action movie, a terrific character study, and one of the most well made movies I've seen in a long time. It's going to be hard to top this in the next few years.

Looking Back: Batman

This is the first post in what will be an ongoing series in which I take an in-depth look at classic movies; a term I'm going to use pretty loosely. Obviously, spoilers abound. For a complete list of the movies, and their reviews, click here. 

Batman (1989): Starring Jack Nicholson, Michael Keaton, and Kim Basinger. Directed by Tim Burton. Screenplay by Sam Hamm and Warren Skaaren. Produced by Peter Gruber and Jon Peters. Cinematography by Roger Pratt. Won 1 Oscar: Best Art Direction/Set Direction.

Tim Burton's Batman gets a lot of the credit (and blame) for the boom in comic book character popularity. Indeed, comic books themselves were something of a misunderstood phenomena up until the late 1980's, as they were dismissed by the general public as kids stuff. Batman as a character was nearing the end of his campy look and beginning to get back to his darker roots with stories like Year One, The Dark Knight Returns, and A Death in the Family. It wasn't until the major success of Burton's film that comic books became a staple in American pop culture. Many people credit the graphic novel The Dark Knight Returns as the major contributor to Batman's return to being the "Dark Knight" rather than the "Caped Crusader". I disagree, and cite Burton's film as the major influence instead, simply because it had a much wider audience at the time of its release.

While Burton's film is dark in tone and narrative, it also pays homage to the first Batman comics ever. Many, if not all, of the set pieces and designs of Burton's two Batman films are very much straight out of the 1940's, with Burton's dystopian twist added to make the city all the more mysterious. The film's fictional newspaper, the Gotham Globe, bustles with the feel of a pre-World War II office. Alexander Knox (Robert Wuhl) even acts like one of those old reporters: a fast but smooth talker trying to get the "scoop", so to speak. However, the character's costumes are straight out of the 1980's. The fusion of these two styles are what I find most fascinating about Burton's two Batman films, as he would continue this style a few years later with Batman Returns, albeit heightened by a significant degree.

Watching the movie for the first time in many years, I can't help but feel as if it can be a bit confusing to someone who doesn't know much about Batman. I feel that the movie would have worked better as a sequel, because it begins with Bruce Wayne already as Batman, although early in his career. We don't really get the explanation for Wayne's reasoning to become Batman until very near the end of the film. Because of this, it makes it difficult to understand why he's doing what he's doing. Instead of this Batman being viewed by the audience as a watchful protector, he comes off as a brooding mystery. While that can really only work for Batman, it just doesn't feel right for a character with such a fascinating beginning. This does distinguish Burton's two Batman movies from the current wave of comic book movies, though; most of which follow the very formulaic trilogy idea of movie 1: origin, movie 2: heightened conflict, and movie 3: disaster/redemption. This idea dates back all the way to The Godfather trilogy, when it's viewed solely as Michael Corleone's story. With this being the first cinematic Batman movie, there really needed to be focus on the origin at some point. If the movie didn't want to waste time dealing with the character's beginnings, it could have worked it into the title sequence. Using graphic novel-like stills, similar to what Spider-Man 2 and 3 did, to tell the early days of Bruce Wayne and the murder of his parents could have been a gripping way to open the movie. It would have been a great compliment to the long time fans of the comic books, and a solid introduction for new fans.

It's important to note that at the time Batman was made, there weren't many guarantees of two to three movie deals. Burton and Keaton left the series after two movies, and some say neither was exactly keen on doing more than one movie. It's safe to say that Burton and company simply didn't want to waste time telling an origin story, and instead just wanted to get right down to business with the character. This would have worked if the movie left more time for the flashbacks it does give us about Wayne becoming Batman, and honestly if it had a more compelling actor in the title role. Like many others, I don't agree with the choice of having Joker being the person who murdered Bruce Wayne's parents. It makes Batman vengeful, which is a trait in him never seen in any iteration before or since. While I don't mind movies taking liberty with their source material, changing Batman's motivation for becoming Batman in the first place just doesn't work.

The highlight in the film is Jack Nicholson's portrayal of Batman's arch rival, the Joker. Just as Burton is to thank partially for the rise in popularity of these characters, Nicholson takes the credit for villains taking center stage in many comic book movies. During the time of the movie's release, Nicholson demanded top billing for Batman, while also getting the most lucrative contract out of all the actors. His attachment to the project, and in such a high profile role as Joker, is what I think really propelled Batman to the huge success it had at the box office, and it's place in pop culture. Because of Nicholson and the role, it seems like many comic book movies nowadays are more interested in colorful villains rather than a compelling hero. Even with Batman Forever, the Batman franchise itself quickly became The Two-Face/Riddler movie, with a special guest appearance by Batman and Robin.

This is not a means to downplay the work Nicholson did in Batman, though, which still holds up after more than two decades. Not only was he able to capture the ridiculous, campy side of the Joker, he also touched on the madness and psychopathic killer within the character. A side that, in my opinion, wouldn't be fully realized until Heath Ledger portrayed Joker in The Dark Knight. There truly is no other movie villain quite like the Joker, and Nicholson's performance feels fresh and new every viewing. It's a difficult task to choose whether Nicholson or Ledger's Joker is better, because they both did things completely different. In my book it's Ledger, but Ledger's performance wouldn't be possible without Nicholson's.

Lando Calris...I mean, Billy Dee Williams, is really underused as Harvey Dent. When he agreed to the movie, it was his understanding that, if there were going to be more movies, he would be there for Dent's transformation to Two-Face. When Tommy Lee Jones was cast as the character in Batman Forever, Williams was crushed, and the filmmakers were forced to buy him out of his contract. I think he would have made a great Two-Face, one much more in tone with the comic book character than Jones' campy portrayal. He's only really used as a nod to the comics in Batman, and it would have been nice to see some more development for his character.

The problem with how fun it is to watch Nicholson presents the movie's major issue: I found myself rooting for the Joker more than I did for Batman. The simple reason is that Jack Nicholson outperforms Michael Keaton's Bruce Wayne/Batman in each and every scene. It's hard to root for a character when there's not that much there that someone can relate with. Obviously, it's quite the stretch to relate to a billionaire dressing up in a batsuit and fighting crime, but that's why the origin story to Batman is so vital to his character.

Many were unhappy with the choice of Keaton for the title role, and I don't disagree. Throughout the movie he looks lost; not quite sure what his mannerism is supposed to be, only that he needs to look brooding, or something to that effect. Granted, the batsuit made it impossible for him to see anything around him, and he had to come up with the idea of turning his entire body in order to see, so the limitations of the suit were no doubt a burden I don't think Keaton expected. However, even when he's portraying Bruce Wayne there's hardly any emotion from him at all, save the scene in Vicki Vale's (Kim Basinger) apartment, where he suddenly goes berserk holding a fireplace rod threatening the Joker. It's way out of character and is unsettling because there's this sudden burst of emotion when we haven't seen any, and there's no reasoning behind what he's doing.

Basinger's Vicki Vale isn't what I would call the most memorable female character in movie history. Vale does a fine enough job, but the character doesn't really have much of a purpose in the movie other than a means to motivate Batman to chase after Joker. However, this becomes a moot point when Batman realizes Joker killed his parents. Michael Gough does a great job as Bruce's trustworthy butler Alfred, but is sort of pushed aside, only showing up on occasion to kind of remind everyone he's there. In fact, almost all of the characters besides Batman and Joker are pushed to the side. This really is a movie more about Batman vs. Joker, but it would have been good for the movie to build up the secondary characters more.

Two of the classic concepts to come from Batman, besides Nicholson's Joker, were the score and the Batmobile. All credit to James Newton Howard and Hans Zimmer for their terrific score in Nolan's trilogy, but I still consider Danny Elfman's the definitive Batman score. The score would go on to be used in the fantastic animated series of the 90's, and the three movie sequels. It's really hard to not think of the score when talking about the character. The Batmobile is arguably the most iconic car in movies as well. Burton and crew wanted to make sure this iteration of Batman was a complete opposite of the campy 1960's TV series, and the Batmobile was maybe the most drastic change.

To the movie's credit, much of it has aged pretty well. I think this is a testament to the fusion of the 40's and 80's styles. It's as if the movie is set in its own time frame, away from the real world. Even though some of the movie still feels very 80's (the Prince soundtrack for instance), it's not so bad that you notice it. The Blu-Ray disc, which I thought would hurt the darker cinematography of the movie, actually helps in bringing it out more. It enhances shots that were otherwise difficult to distinguish, rather than diminish them. I think the movie goes a bit too dark with killing Joker. Although bringing Nicholson back for a sequel would have been highly unlikely, it just seems wrong to kill the best comic book villain ever. Christopher Nolan understood this, even though Ledger's untimely death halted any chance of seeing Joker in the sequel to The Dark Knight. It would have at least been nice to know Joker was around somewhere during Batman Returns.

Despite my issues with it, Batman is still a pretty fun movie overall. It falls short in some areas, but it no doubt has an important place in the history of pop culture. If this movie would have failed, then I really don't think comic book movies would be as popular today as they are. Obviously the four Superman movies with Christopher Reeve were all released before Batman, but Superman IV: The Quest for Peace left such a terrible final note on the series that it was up to Batman to save the genre. It did, and still holds up more than twenty years after it first hit theaters.

2013 Oscar Preview

The day is finally here. Probably the tightest Oscar race in years concludes tonight, in perhaps a not so surprising way. Lincoln leads all nominees with twelve, followed by Life of Pi with eleven. There were so many great movies this year that I get the feeling many movies are going to go home tonight with at least one win, and there isn't going to be one movie that dominates most of the categories. I personally enjoy years like this. It shows that the Oscars recognize how great of a year it's been for movies, and while only one can walk away with Best Picture, many more are recognized throughout the night.

I'm personally very excited for the broadcast. The past few Oscar telecasts have been pretty boring, to say the least. I think the choice of Seth MacFarlane will not only bring a more modern vibe to the event, but also bring in younger viewers who may not have tuned in otherwise. There are also plenty of rumors surrounding various appearances at the show, with I think the most exciting being the rumor that all six men to play James Bond will appear. Adele is set to perform her song, "Skyfall", from the newest Bond movie of the same name, and there is also a planned tribute to the 50th anniversary of the character. Many people have speculated this would mean that the six men to play Bond on the big screen, Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan, and Daniel Craig, will all appear together to kick off the tribute. It would be the first time ever all six men have appeared at a tribute for the character. However, early talk made it seem as if Connery was the lone man to not want to do it, but a part of me thinks he may have come around to the idea. Commercials for the Oscars have begun to focus on the Bond tribute, which makes me believe even more that something big is set to happen. I think if it were to happen, it would end up being one of the best moments in the history of the Oscars. Imagine the reaction if all six walk out on stage as Adele is wrapping up "Skyfall", with a montage of the character's best moments playing on the big screen.

Host Seth MacFarlane

However, the big reason we watch the show is to find out who will win. Like I said earlier, there are a lot of great movies up for awards tonight and it really could go in several different directions. Lincoln and Argo are the two frontrunners, but don't be surprised if smaller movies like Amour and Silver Linings Playbook walk away with some bigger prizes. Everyone has talked that, without Ben Affleck nominated for Best Director, it's a two way race between Steven Spielberg (Lincoln) and Ang Lee (Life of Pi). While these two are the most likely, don't be surprised if Michael Haneke sneaks in with a win for Amour, which is as much a lock as there is in the Best Foreign Language category. Anne Hathaway is pretty much a sure thing as well for Best Supporting Actress for her terrific performance in Les Misérables, but watch out for an upset from Sally Field in Lincoln. There's also the question of whether or not Pixar can still dominate the Best Animated Feature category. While I think Brave is one of their better movies, moviegoers seemed to enjoy Wreck-It-Ralph more. Pixar didn't even have a movie nominated last year (Cars 2 was really that bad), so it'll be interesting to see if they can reclaim their throne.

Below are my predictions for tonight's winners. I've also included my personal picks on who should win, and for the bigger categories, highlight some movies and performances that the Oscars missed out on nominating. Be sure to watch the telecast tonight at 8:30 on ABC!

Best Picture
Will Win: Argo
Should Win: Argo
Left Out: Moonrise Kingdom, Skyfall

Best Director
Will Win: Steven Spielberg, Lincoln
Should Win: Ben Affleck, Argo (not nominated)
Left Out: Affleck, Kathryn Bigelow Zero Dark Thirty, Quentin Tarantino Django Unchained

Best Actor
Will Win: Daniel Day-Lewis, Lincoln
Should Win: Day-Lewis
Left Out: John Hawkes, The Sessions




Best Actress
Will Win: Jennifer Lawrence, Silver Linings Playbook
Should Win: Jessica Chastain, Zero Dark Thirty
Left Out: Marion Cotillard, Rust and Bone

Best Supporting Actor 
Will Win: Robert De Niro, Silver Linings Playbook
Should Win: Honestly, any of them are deserving.
Left Out: Leonardo DiCaprio, Django Unchained

Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway in Les Misérables

Best Supporting Actress
Will Win: Anne Hathaway, Les Misérables
Should Win: Hathaway
Left Out: Judi Dench, Skyfall

Best Original Screenplay
Will Win: Zero Dark Thirty
Should Win: Django Unchained
Left Out: Looper

Best Adapted Screenplay
Will Win: Argo
Should Win: Argo
Left Out: The Perks of Being a Wallflower

These predictions for the "lesser" categories will just include my winner predictions:

Best Animated Feature
Brave

Best Animated Short
Paperman

Best Foreign Language Film
Amour

Best Feature Documentary
Searching for Sugar Man

Best Documentary Short 
Open Heart

Best Cinematography
Skyfall

Best Production Design
Anna Karenina

Best Costume Design
Anna Karenina

Best Original Score
Life of Pi

Best Original Song
Skyfall

Best Editing
Argo

Best Sound Editing
Skyfall

Best Sound Mixing
Les Misérables

Best Visual Effects
Life of Pi

Best Live Action Short
Curfew

Best Makeup and Hairstyling
Les Misérables

A Good Day to Die Hard Review

Fans of the Die Hard series were begging for an R-rated movie after Live Free or Die Hard was rated PG-13. It was blasphemous! How can you have a movie with John McClane be PG-13?! Well, the fans got what they wanted, but like Linkin Park sang, in the end it doesn't really matter.

A Good Day to Die Hard is the fifth film in the franchise, and hopefully it's the last one, at least for awhile. Bruce Willis  is back as NYPD Cop John McClane, and he fits into the character as well as he can after 20+ years in the series. He's about the only highlight in an otherwise awful, awful movie. The movie focuses on him heading to Russia to find his son, Jack, played by Jai Courtney, who he thinks is a drug dealer or something. Yeah, because in order for Jack to be a successful drug dealer, he had to travel all the way to Russia. Anyway, John finds out his son is working for the CIA on a top-secret nuclear weapons case, and the two team up like the father-son duo they are and head out to stop the bad guys.

Ugh. What's happened to this series? Honestly, I mean, the original Die Hard is probably one of, if not the best action movies of all time. What makes it so great is that it doesn't resort itself to mindless action and car chases, but builds tension and gives great payoffs because of it. It's the perfect mix of a being a great action movie that you don't have to think about in order to enjoy, but if you pay attention, it's even better. This movie is the complete opposite. A movie that is straight-up action for 97 minutes can be really great if it's done the right way. Director John Moore's action sequences are such a jumbled mess that you can't even enjoy them, and a five minute car chase feels like it takes hours to slog through. There's far too much cutting and editing in the movie that we can't even begin to understand what we're watching or why.

One of the great things about the original movie (and the third, Die Hard with a Vengeance) is that the villains are just as entertaining, if not more so, than McClane. Yeah, we know we're rooting for McClane, and know he's going to win, but having a great villain testing him throughout the movie adds to how fun and exciting it can be to watch. With A Good Day, the villains are just there as a means to move the movie towards its conclusion. Granted, this movie is more about the relationship between McClane and his son, but there needs to be real danger there; there needs to be a sense that the villain's have a chance at winning, or at least be enjoyable when they're on screen. Another major issue is that there's too many villains for one movie; just another example of the movie trying top itself, and the series, again and again.

I understand that action movies aren't going to make much sense in terms of real world scenarios. I get it: the more ridiculous the action, the more fun it can be. But a movie shouldn't treat it's audience like complete idiots. Without giving much away, I'll say that the final action scenes of the movie take place in Chernobyl. Yeah, that Chernobyl, the one devastated by nuclear fallout and has been abandoned for years; where the radiation level is so high that it may never be livable again. Minor characters walk around in HAZMAT suits so as not to be affected by the radiation levels. What do John and Jack do? They drive to Chernobyl, and just start shooting the place up in their street clothes. No need for radiation suits here! The McClane's are invisible! I can understand that you can't have a climatic action sequence while not being able to see the faces of your stars if they're hidden under a HAZMAT suit, but seriously, they couldn't have put the scene in another city in Russia? I'm not expecting the movie to be as accurate as can be, but ridiculous things like this made me hate the movie even more than I already did.

Yippee Ki-Yuck

The only real redeeming thing about A Good Day is that Bruce Willis is still fun to watch as this character. He still has great timing and is just as spry of an action hero as his younger counterpart. But the rest of the movie is just downright shit. There really is no other way to say it. I really can't see there being a sixth Die Hard after this. Even though the fourth movie wasn't exactly terrific, I thought it was decent enough to warrant a fifth movie, just to see how it would go. This movie could have been so much more than it is. The idea of having McClane team up with his son is actually a really good idea. It could have taken a similar route as Skyfall did with James Bond, and realize that John McClane is getting old, and he can't do this kind of stuff too much longer. It could have been the beginning of passing the series onto his son; maybe a sixth movie is where John finally calls it quits, and movie seven follows his son exclusively, starting a reboot for the franchise of sorts. It would still honor the roots of the series, while updating itself for a new generation. 

Instead, it's as if the writers just couldn't think of a way to get John McClane into Russia on his own, so they had to send his son over there. By the way, one of the things I don't get is that John keeps yelling, "I'm on vacation!" throughout the movie. I thought he was coming to Russia to get his son, so technically he's not on vacation? 

It's really upsetting to see this franchise fall so flat on its face. Die Hard spawned so many knock offs that it was refreshing to see it stay true to itself with most of the movies in its series. A Good Day to Die Hard, though, is just as bad of a parody of the original as anything that came after it. As much as I can't see another movie being made, there's a big part of me that sees that as inevitable. The movie is tops at the box office right now, and as long as Bruce Willis continues to be willing to return to the role, I don't see them shutting the series down anytime soon. I just hope that the right director can be found who will be willing to bring the franchise back to its roots and remember what made this series so successful in the first place. Until then, A Good Day to Die Hard leaves a very bad lasting memory of a once great series.

Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Movie

Safe Haven Review

There's a part of me that says I shouldn't have enjoyed this movie as much as I did. I'm not trying to say I thought the movie was fantastic or anything, but that it kind of exceeded my expectations. Granted, judging from the early reviews I read and just the overall experience with movies like this (sappy romances), I didn't expect hardly anything, and came away from it pleasantly surprised.

Julianne Hough is being hunted down for murder, and so to escape, she catches a bus ride down to Southport, North Carolina, where she quickly makes friends with Josh Duhamel and his two kids. Of course the two fall instantly in love and neither really seems to question why just about everyone they interact with in this town is so god damn good looking. In any case, Hough tries to make a new life. She gets a job at the local restaurant, and buys a shack in the woods to live in, which seems kind of odd considering she's frightened almost every night that there's someone outside trying to break in. Isn't there another house in the actual city of Southport? Also, the town doesn't seem to worry about trivial matters such as credit history or bank accounts when it comes to purchasing a home, even if it is a cabin in the woods. Anyway, while Hough is playing house in North Carolina, a detective is looking for her back in her hometown, who, despite his good looks (seriously! Is there not one ugly person in Nicholas Sparks' world??), has some hidden demons that may compromise his ability to find her. Or something like that.

They're trying desperately to make a movie star out of Julianne Hough, who starred in last year's Rock of Ages, but she just doesn't quite deliver a memorable performance here. It's just pretty meh. I get the feeling she'll get a few more starring roles in movies like this, but I don't see her becoming another Rachel McAdams or someone to that effect who's a bankable romance star. She does, however, have a starring role in Diablo Cody's directorial debut, Paradise, which is set for a release later this year. Cody wrote the screenplays for great movies focusing on female leads like Juno and Young Adult, so that is maybe Hough's best chance at showing that she has what it takes to be a star in Hollywood.

It irks me that in all of these kinds of movies lately the female star is a tall, borderline unhealthily-thin blonde, and the male lead is a rugged-looking outcast. It's what I call The Notebook effect. There really isn't two more prototypical stereotypes in romance movies, and I wish that more of these movies would step out of that element into something different. Would it make the movie significantly better? Probably not, but it'd be nice to see a variety in the stars of these movies. After awhile, it becomes impossible to separate the Julianne Hough's from the Taylor Schilling's of movie world.

I felt like the whole plotline of the detective searching for Hough really made the movie drag in the middle. Again, this is the kind of movie that could have been cut by 20 minutes and not really lost much in terms of its overall story. The scenes with the detective really took me out of the romance between Duhamel and Hough's characters, which is kind of the point of the movie in the first place. I guess I can see why that storyline is there (it builds for the inevitable climatic ending), but it just weighed the movie down. There's a twist towards the end of the movie that isn't really all that shocking to begin with (careful watchers will be able to pick up the clues as the movie goes along), which gives the ending that little extra Nicholas Sparks sappy ending we've seen before.

Even the kids are adorable!

Probably the best thing about Safe Haven is the scenery. It's set in a coastal North Carolina town, and it makes for some really nice looking shots, particularly towards the end of the movie, set on July 4th evening. Duhamel has some really great moments with the two kids in the movie, and he gives a really convincing performance as a father to them. It's not anything forced or that seems fake. There are a few storylines with the kids that I kind of wish the movie would have focused on more, but then again the movie isn't really about them.

People have said that the twist is ludicrous and insulting, but I disagree. It wasn't something that came as a shock, and, while I don't really think the movie benefited enough from the twist in order to warrant it being in there, it kind of makes sense in the context of the movie. I didn't find it all that shocking; I had it mostly figured out about thirty minutes in, but the movie could have done more with it. I think it would have been interesting to learn the twist earlier in the movie. While it probably makes early scenes more intriguing on a second viewing, I feel a movie should base itself around the idea that people are only going to see it once. Safe Haven isn't the kind of movie that needs to end with a surprising twist.

I've never read a Nicholas Sparks book. I probably will at some point just to get an idea of his writing style, but I can't imagine all his books being as cookie cutter as the adaptions that have come from them. Even though I highlighted a few things I liked in Safe Haven, there's far too much here that we've seen before in other romantic dramas recently. There are scenes in Safe Haven taken almost directly from other movies based off his books like The Lucky One and The Notebook. I think that is the main problem critics tend to have with these movies. Although they're different on some levels, most of the plot is the same as the last movie. The Lucky One and Safe Haven are in many ways the same movie, with just a reversal of gender for the main characters. Also, can I just ask, why is there so much rain in all his movies? And why is it always during a big dramatic scene? There are other forms of weather, people!

Safe Haven pretty much boils down to being just a more well-funded Lifetime movie. I don't necessarily mean that as an insult, but that's basically what we're dealing with here. There's nothing new that stands out or makes it memorable from the countless other romantic dramas we've seen since The Notebook started this Nicholas Sparks type of romance drama back in 2004. That being said, it's not a terrible movie, it's just kind of there. It's merely a means to get couples into the seats for a date night on a weekend.

Has its Moments

Identity Thief Movie Review

Trying to make an identity thief a likable character? Probably something that sounds really impossible, and at times I didn't think Identity Thief would be able to pull it off, but somehow it did. Maybe that's more credit to how funny and just downright lovable Melissa McCarthy is than the movie itself. Identity Thief stars McCarthy and Jason Bateman, and to make a long story short McCarthy steals Bateman's identity and is living it up down in Florida. She's buying way too much stuff for one person and is having way too good a time doing it that you almost begin to kind of envy her a little. Only a little bit. I mean, she is a criminal, right? Who would want to buy anything they ever wanted and get away with it, most of the time? Anyway, in order for him to get his job and financial name back, he has to go down to Florida and bring her back to his home in Colorado.  It really doesn't make all that much sense if this were a real world situation, but, it's a stupid-comedy. We just go with it. It sets the movie up as another road trip comedy with two people who don't want anything to do with one another, and we get all of the obligatory road trip type jokes that we've seen before, yet they're still pretty funny no matter how many times we've seen them.

The great thing about Identity Thief is that both Bateman and McCarthy are both really, really funny in pretty much everything that they do. Also, both are really likable as well. The only problem is that they both play pretty much the same characters in all of their movies. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, (if it ain't broke, don't fix it, right?) but what if the roles were reversed? We've seen McCarthy as this outspoken, sassy do-it-all-myself woman before in movies like Bridesmaids, and Bateman's hard working family man in stuff like Horrible Bosses. But what if this time McCarthy was the victim and Bateman was the con? I think it could have been great to see these two kind of step out of their element a little bit into a role they're not all that familiar with. It's not to say that the movie isn't funny enough as is, but it could have made it a little more unique if the roles were reversed. 

If I'm thinking correctly, other than the TV show Mike & Molly this is McCarthy's first starring role in a movie. She has another movie coming out in April co-starring Sandra Bullock titled The Heat, which looks pretty funny as well. The success or failure of these two movies will kind of be a good indication of if McCarthy has what it takes to be a leading lady in movies, or is going to be the type of actress destined for supporting roles her whole career. I think she could be a great comedy star as long as she picks the right movies, and doesn't just do any comedy where she's getting the lead role.

Like I said before we've seen this kind of road trip comedy before, but the movie tries to make it different by bringing in a plot point of having several hit men after McCarthy. I guess it makes sense in the context of the movie, seeing that she's stolen other people's identities and probably pissed off a lot of people. But, to be honest there's no reason for it to be in the movie, and it just makes Identity Thief drag on in a few spots. You can have an enjoyable road trip movie without someone chasing someone. The movie is two hours long, and I honestly can't think of a reason why it couldn't be thirty minutes shorter. When I come to see a movie like Identity Thief, I'm not seeing it for its aesthetic quality or for it to make me think. I'm coming to see it because I want to laugh and have an enjoyable time. While there are some really funny moments in the movie, the sub plot with the hit men really makes the movie drag. There should be a requirement that stupid but enjoyable comedies like Identity Thief are no more than 90 minutes long, unless you can prove that you can keep the pace of the movie going without much of a hiccup along the way. 

Even though this is mostly designed as a straight up comedy, there are some really touching moments towards the end where McCarthy and Bateman bond and you think okay, I guess I can kind of see why this woman would feel the need to steal people's identities and ruin their entire lives for her own benefit. The movie ends with some pretty touching scenes that almost don't feel like they belong in this type of movie, but they work because McCarthy and Bateman do a good job of making them seem true to the characters that they're playing. 

Even though there's some plot issues and it's not exactly a rip-roaring comedy that will have you falling out of your seat, Identity Thief is a good time. This is the type of movie that you just sit back and enjoy and try not to think about too much. It's pretty forgettable, but it it's enjoyable enough while you're watching it. McCarthy is great, Bateman is good, and they work really well together. It's just not quite good enough for me to say that you need to go see this movie right now. It is what it is, and that's pretty much all we want it to be. 

Has Its Moments