Daredevil Series Review

The initial response I had to Marvel’s Daredevil were flashbacks to a terrible movie involving Ben Affleck, a strange Colin Farrell, and an annoying Jennifer Garner.

Thankfully, every single aspect of the 2003 Daredevil was rectified in Marvel’s official take on the hero of Hell’s Kitchen. 

Daredevil starts right off with the show’s hero, Matt Murdock, played by Charlie Cox, snapping someone’s kneecap and brutally beating several other sex traffickers. It’s clear from the beginning that Daredevil is nothing like anything else in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). Daredevil’s tone is incredibly dark, dealing with ground level issues instead of an alien invasion, or one of the infinity gems from the Avenger films. Daredevil is an outlier, and because of this separation, it is truly able to shine.

The fighting in Daredevil happens frequently and many of the scenes capture the desperation and grueling physical toll of battle. Murdock is utterly broken after several fights despite winning, lending a great credibility to Daredevil’s premise of a very vulnerable man trying to clean up his neighborhood. 

One scene that stands out is Murdock battling six or seven thugs in one long, continuous shot in a narrow hallway, and the result is mesmerizing.

Murdock is fighting the vices of organized crime; sex trafficking, heroin use, bribery, and extortion. These ground level issues and the singular focus on the setting of Hell’s Kitchen really make Daredevil the most self-contained story in the MCU, and allows it to flourish and stand on its own.

The show attempts to make subtle references to other big Marvel heroes such as Thor and Captain America, but they are awkwardly executed, and are of little importance to the show’s plot.

Speaking of the plot, it takes its time to develop, with both the protagonist and antagonist methodically planning how to take out, or draw out the other. It does in fact slow down a little too much in the second half, but it eventually picks back up.

The show’s plot centers on Hell’s Kitchen, and the need to save it. The city itself feels like an infected dying patient with King Pin and Daredevil as two surgeons who have conflicting methods on how to save it.

Although everyone has a fairly strong performance in Daredevil, the show is held up by its two central characters: Daredevil, played by Cox, and King Pin, played by Vincent D’Onofrio, who recently starred in the blockbuster hit, Jurassic World. Cox plays a low-key, clever lawyer who practices with a good sense of humor and keeps his actions within the law. Cox as Daredevil, however, is relentless and unforgiving. He proves that he is not someone you cross. Several great scenes where he conducts interrogations certainly come to mind, as he conveys his brutal nature by threatening to and ultimately breaking his victims’ bones. 

King Pin is the primary antagonist of season one, but I felt Marvel cleverly decided to dig a little deeper into the character, and turn him into an anti-hero. Straying away from the source material of King Pin as a stereotypical bad guy really made his story, which consumes a considerable chunk of the show, a lot more compelling. 

Daredevil hit the ground running, and showed an assured confidence right from the first episode. The show wiped my memory clean of the 2003 Affleck disaster, as director Drew Goddard’s lethal execution shines, and lands more than a few haymakers. Marvel deserves applause.

The Devil of Hell’s Kitchen earned his keep with 4/5 beaten-to-a-pulp apples

Jurassic World Review: “We Need More Teeth”

The original Jurassic Park is one of those movies that people must see at least once in their lifetime. It is a cultural phenomenon, and it is one hell of a movie.

The success of Jurassic Park in 1992 spawned two sequels: The  highly underrated The Lost World in 1997, and the highly disappointing Jurassic Park Three.

Now, 14 years later, we have Jurassic World; a film that fans of the beloved series have had their hopes pinned on since its release date was announced back in 2013. In the mean time, it has become one of the most highly anticipated movies of 2015.

So, does Jurassic World live up to the hype and act as a palate cleanser for the bad taste Jurassic Park Three left? In short, it certainly does.

The opening of Jurassic World follows two brothers who are being sent to Isla Nublar, the island that is home to the Jurassic World theme park, to stay with their distant aunt, played by Bryce Dallas Howard, who is also one of the cogs behind the park’s creation. Sound familiar? The kids in the original film visited Richard Attenborough’s character John Hammond, who was their grandfather and the founder of the original park.

Once at the park, the classic John Williams Jurassic Park theme music roars into the background, and the audience is welcomed to the new and improved Jurassic World theme park, and it’s a thing of beauty.

By the time the film begins, the park has already been established as one of the top tourist attractions in the world, and believe it or not, visitors are becoming bored with the dinosaurs on display.

In the hopes of instilling new life and excitement to their attraction, the park’s genetics team has been working to improve the quality of their assets by creating genetic hybrids. Their newest creation is called “Indominus Rex;” a dinosaur that is mixed with a variety of genes from different dinosaurs and other animals. The result is a terrifying and intelligent killing machine, and it looks awesome.

The original Jurassic Park had the best CGI of its time. Even with 22 years of technological innovation, the film’s CGI holds up. In Jurassic World, CGI is heavily relied upon, and even though it’s 2015, I have to admit that Jurassic Park’s visual effects look more realistic.

The CGI in Jurassic World is good, don’t get me wrong, but the old dark, gritty style of Jurassic Park’s CGI made the dinosaurs seem like living, breathing animals. That style has been replaced with a sleeker and shinier one, and it’s not as believable.  Perhaps there is a practical reason for it, as the genetically-enhanced dinosaurs are meant to look bigger, sexier, and come equipped with more teeth.

Chris Pratt’s performance as Owen Grady, a raptor whisperer of sorts, was great, as he continues to grow into a true hollywood star. His character was very similar to his character of Star Lord in Guardians of the Galaxy, and provided just the right mixture of action-hero persona and comedy.

Yeah, he’s a badass.

Howard’s performance as Claire Dearing truly surprised me, as I went into the movie thinking that she was going to be a stern, uptight female authority figure who lacks a likable personality. While her character is a little uptight, she brings a lot to the table in terms of emotion, humor, and personality. I really bought her performance, and she and Pratt had excellent chemistry.

Unfortunately, none of the other performances stood out for me. I was not a fan of Vincent D’Onofrio’s character, as he was just an obnoxious, stereotypical, and cliche military personality.

I was gad to see comedian Jake Johnson play a small role. While his character was also a stereotype, I thought he provided necessary comedic relief.

While there were some funny scenes in Jurassic World, not all of the jokes hit their mark. There were a lot of moments where I didn’t laugh despite recognizing something was meant to be funny.

The action, however, is the highlight of the movie and it hits its mark big time as the scenes involving the Indominus Rex are thrilling, fun, and intense. The last thirty minutes won me over, as it provided a satisfying conclusion to the film.

Jurassic World is not a perfect film, and it can’t recapture the magic of the original, but it is a hell of a lot better than JP3, and is a fun-filled thrill-ride with terrific performances from Pratt and Howard.

4/5 prehistorically ripe apples.

Mad Max: Fury Road Review

A film like Mad Max: Fury Road is a rarity nowadays in the year 2015. Unlike typical action films, this one employs very little CGI special effects and instead contains hyperrealistic practical effects to convey the violent and furious atmosphere of its world.

In terms of action, Fury Road succeeds marvelously, and in my opinion, cements itself as one of the best action films in the last decade.

Seasoned veterans of the Mad Max series will fondly remember Max being portrayed by a young, budding Mel Gibson. They will also fondly remember George Miller’s ambitious manifestation of a post-apocalyptic world where gas and water are sparse, and a medley of aesthetically creative vehicles driven by war hungry mad men rule the land.

Miller’s 1979, 1981, and 1985 Mad Max films presented a world that was indeed ambitious, but perhaps a little before their time. The world that Miller was trying to establish was missing 30 years of technological innovation.

Now, instead of Mad Max looking like this.

it can now look like this.

And even this…

Yes, technology has transformed Miller’s Mad Max world into one of both grit and beauty, and the visuals are only the beginning.

Replacing Gibson as the mysterious Max is Tom Hardy, who most will remember as Bane from The Dark Knight Rises. His performance is suitable for the role, as the character of Max seldom talks, and is a man of mystery. Besides an opening monologue, Max doesn’t have much to say. However when he does speak, Hardy’s lines exude sarcasm and humility. Despite Max’s delusions throughout the film brought on by the insanity of his world, his moments of dialogue are the voice of reason. When Max does seldom speak, he portrays the level-headed voice of reason that connects their world to ours.

From old film to new, Max knows he is a badass. The opening of the film nicely captures his renegade character. At the same time, Max’s character lacks the pretentious attitude sometimes possessed by male action heroes (ex: Tony Stark). The foil to Hardy’s character is Nick Holt’s character, who unlike Max, spends the majority of the movie attempting to prove his worth. Holt’s performance conveys this brilliantly, and due to the animated nature of his character versus Max’s, he ends up outshining the film’s protagonist.

While the trailer may paint this film out to be a barrage of manly horse-powered testosterone, the female characters stand out, and like Holt, ultimately have a more lasting impact than Max himself, especially Charlize Theron. Her character, for me, absolutely stole the show. She provided sleek confidence in a dreadfully filthy world. Each female role was well done, as Miller quietly relays a feminist message in the midst of numerous explosions.

Ah yes, let’s talk about explosions.

The explosions in Fury Road, minus one or two, are all practically realized. Aka, no CGI. In 2015 where filmmakers rely often too heavily on CGI to create visually stunning action sequences, knowing that those are real cars being blown to bits by real explosions is quite refreshing. There are plenty of them, too.

Aside from explosions, the tone of Fury Road’s post-apocalyptic wasteland is perfectly conveyed through the look of not only the characters, but the vehicles they drive, which come equipped with a gritty, rusted, and appropriately reckless look and feel to them. The characters’ outfits and faces perfectly capture the bleak and desperate tone of the world they attempt to live in.

The word “reckless” is the perfect descriptor for this movie, as the exhilarating action and constant speed at which the movie operates emits recklessness.

I mean, just look at this maniac wielding a flame-spewing guitar.

Mad Max: Fury Road is everything a moviegoer could ever want from an action movie; beautiful explosions, awesome characters, and ridiculous action sequences. It is one hell of a way to kick off what will hopefully be a great summer for movies, and sets the bar at a high-octane level. It is an exhilarating joyride from start to finish.

5/5 Explosively juicy apple

Avengers: Age of Ultron Review

Back in 2012 when the first Avengers movie made its long awaited appearance on theater screens across the world, the film was hailed for its stellar accomplishment; bringing a comic book nerd’s dreams to life by featuring Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, and The Hulk together in the same movie.

Four years later, the magic of seeing my favorite heroes together on screen was just as thrilling with Age of Ultron as it was back in 2012; even with a couple of newcomers added to the mix.

Director Joss Whedon is able to recapture the witty and entertaining dialogue between the heroes, and shows again why he’s the master of banter. One scene involving Thor’s hammer is was one of the more enjoyable dialogue-driven scenes in the movie.

Each actor perfectly portrays his or her hero. Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark once again steals the show with Chris Evans and Chris Hemsworth flexing their muscles as Captain America and Thor.

The biggest surprise for me was Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye. In the first original, Renner’s Hawkeye got the short end of the stick since he was Locki’s personal puppet for half the movie. This time around, the character is fleshed out and has more to work with.

Age of Ultron is able to take full advantage of not having to waste time with a back-story, as the first 10 minutes of the movie get right to the action, which is top notch and continues the fun tradition Marvel has established. There are plenty of “jaw-dropping” and applause-worthy moments, along with a lot of teaming-up between Captain America’s Shield and Thor’s hammer.

The highlight of the action for me was the big battle between Tony Stark’s “Hulkbuster” suit and The Hulk. That scene alone is worth the price of admission, and is cluttered with incredible action sequences.

The newest additions to the team include Elizabeth Olson as Scarlet Witch and Aaron Taylor-Johnson as Quicksilver. While they are vastly overshadowed by the star-power of the other heroes, they are still enjoyable additions, even if I preferred Quicksilver’s portrayal in Days of Futures Past. My favorite new inductee was The Vision played by Paul Bettany. Vision instills a sleek confidence which was missing from the gritty group of heroes, and his introduction opens the door for future events in the Marvel universe.

The introduction of new heroes, however, adds to an already clustered ensemble. While Whedon does the best he can and is mostly successful, the crowded-ness does take away from other parts of the movie.

For example, James Spader’s Ultron is not given an rigorous back story, as his origin feels rushed. With a stronger back story, Ultron could have been a much more compelling villain. However, once Ultron establishes himself as the “bad guy,” Spader excels at conveying Ultron’s intentions and detest towards mankind’s current state.

Hulk, smash?

My biggest gripe with the movie was the random romance between Scarlett Johansson’s Black Widow and Mark Ruffalo’s Bruce Banner. The reason’s for their interest in each other makes sense, but the relationship is totally out of left field and feels unnecessary, especially for a film that is tasked with balancing so many story-lines at once.

Also, some scenes involving Scarlet Witch and members of the Avengers seemed a bit out of place, and detracted from momentum in certain junctures of the movie.

Overall, Age of Ultron is as much fun as its predecessor. Whedon succeeds yet again at meshing these larger than life personalities, while giving each the appropriate amount of screen time. The action is breathtaking and rekindles the magic of the first one. Not once did I think, “oh, I’ve seen this before. Despite a rushed origin story for Ultron, and a shoe-horned romance between Johansson and Ruffalo, I never felt bored while watching this movie.

5/5 Just-as-ripe-as-the-last apples

It Follows Review

 

It Follows is a movie that will split viewers down the middle.

People who go in expecting the same cliches that plague modern-day horror movies, and want to see more of the same will be highly disappointed.

However, people who want a fresh take on the horror genre will be pleased with It Follows, as it’s one of the most unique horror movies I’ve ever seen.

The film is directed by David Robert Mitchell starring Maika Monroe. The plot of the film is straight forward: After a sexual encounter, a girl is cursed by “It,” which is an entity that constantly follows and tries to kill her. The only way to get rid of “It” is to pass it on to someone else through sex. However, if the person she transfers it to is then killed, “It” will return to following her. “It” can take the form of anyone, even people who love the infected. The concept is frightening. Just the thought of trying to escape something that won’t stop following you, something that never fatigues, something that never quits would send shivers down anybody’s spine.

So, what makes It Follows so unique?

Well for starters, The score by Distaserpiece is brilliant. It has a 70s-80s electronic style, and possesses a resonating beat familiar to any fan of John Carpenter’s Halloween. What makes the score standout most is its new yet familiar modern techno, bringing you back to an original Nintendo game crossed with Freddy Krueger.

The performances were great all around, especially Monroe as the lead role. All the actors felt modest and awkward, which made their portrayal as teenagers so real and believable.

It Follow’s cinematography is excellent and by far the best part of the movie. Each shot feels important, precise, and polished. It’s clear that each shot served a purpose, and Mitchell’s directing style makes the film visually riveting.

The film pays homage to classic horror films through not only the score, but the ambiguous portrayal of the movie’s time period. Outside, in the neighborhoods and other outside scenery, it looks pretty typical 2015. Inside, however, there are old school rabbit-ear television sets, and old style lamps. The only true representation of current-day technology is a mysterious seashell tablet device that one of the characters is obsessed with like a cell phone.

In terms of scares, It Follows doesn’t rely on cheap jump-scares or meaningless suspense to deliver frights (besides one or two occasions). Instead, the film relies on disturbing images and mind games to unnerve the audience.

The weaknesses of It Follows stem from the vagueness surrounding “It.” There’s only one authority that explains what “It” is, and while that testimony’s explanation is sufficient to the film’s enjoyment, the lack of authority and ambiguity surrounding “It” is frustrating, even if the mystery is meant to emphasize the terror.

There are also moments in the movie that are never truly explained, and are ultimately left up the audience’s interpretation. While movies should respect their audiences instead of spoon-feeding them plot points, the lack of explanation in certain scenes adds frustration to a movie that is littered with mystery.

The most interesting thing about It Follows is the way it makes you think once the credits role. The ending especially will be enough to spark conversations between friends and family who go to see the movie. The most popular conversations will revolve around what people think “It” actually is. After leaving the theater, Julia and I discussed what we thought “It” was as we left the theater, got in the car, when we got home, and before we knew it, we were browsing Reddit discussions (warning spoilers) about different theories.

After hours of speculation, we think we have come up with a solid theory:

“It” is a metaphor for teenage sexual shame. You’ll have to see the movie to fully understand why we believe this, but for now I’ll try to explain without spoilers. The idea that “It” stays with you even after the sexual encounter symbolizes the shame that surrounds teenagers after engaging in a regrettable sexual encounter, and yes, it’s also a metaphor for STDs. The idea that one can erase a regrettable encounter by sleeping with someone else is symbolized through “It” never truly leaving the original carrier, because “It” always eventually comes back to you. The fact that “It” is constantly following its prey is the physical manifestation of shame because one can try to run from their decisions, but never escape. There are ambiguous scenes throughout the film that support this as well, such as a scene where she suspects she’s pregnant, and another involving a pool of blood to symbolize an abortion.

Any rational person who sees It Follows will think that It Follows is simply trying to send an anti-sex message to teenagers. An original notion of mine was that Mitchell was attempting to send a religious message against pre-marital sex, but he shot that theory down in an interview with FirstShowing.net.

Overall, It Follows offers more questions than answers. Despite this, it is a refreshing entry into the horror movie genre as it doesn’t borrow the same, tired formula that almost every modern horror movie seems to adopt. It’s disturbing, though-provoking, but most importantly, different.

3/5 ambitiously unique, and disturbingly crisp apples

Fifty Shades of Grey Review

So, I have a confession to make. This past Valentine’s Day, I saw Fifty Shades of Grey with Julia, numerous groups of women, and elderly couples.

Reviews for this movie were awful, with a 26% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and a 4.1 out of 10 on IMDB. Reviewers even said that there wasn’t a lot of sex in the movie, which is odd for a movie that is, for all intents and purposes, a movie about sex. Needless to say, I walked into this movie with very low expectations, and perhaps that benefited the movie.

Fifty Shades is not a good movie, but it is not the garbage that many people said it was. It’s mediocre. For starters, there is more “sex” than reviewers let on. The lead actress, Dakota Johnson, is shown nude for a large portion of the movie, and her counterpart, Jamie Dornan, is shirtless for a large portion as well. As for actual sexual acts? Well, there’s not as much as fans or curious viewers were probably hoping for. The earlier sex scenes, are treated with more care, and are a little more fleshed out. Once the BDSM aspect is brought into the mix, however, the scenes become more rushed. It’s as if the director just threw those scenes into the movie just for the sake of staying true to the source material.

Julia’s read the trilogy and had this to say:

All around, it’s what you’d expect if you’ve read the books. We all knew there couldn’t possibly be as much graphic detail as in the books for it to premier as an R rated movie, but it does a good job of capturing the spirit of their relationship. Considering how this story was modeled after Twilight, I was worried the main character, Anna, would be the same plain and ordinary type as Bella in order for you to imagine yourself in her place, but that wasn’t the case. Dakota Johnson was fantastic, and Anna’s personality and development was my favorite part of the movie. Jamie Dornan wasn’t enirely what I expected, but Christian Grey is a lot to live up to. This interview he did with Jimmie Fallon was hilarious if you haven’t seen it.

Dakota Johnson as Anastasia Steele was by far the highlight of the movie, but I admit it took me a little bit to determine whether she was talented or not. In the end, I concluded that she is actually pretty talented, and did a great job portraying a women who transforms from a shy, nerdy girl, into a confident and empowering young woman.

Jamie Dornan as Christian Grey, on the other hand, didn’t really bring anything game changing to the table, and I feel like they could’ve casted any guy with abs to play his role.

The movie looks great visually, as every scene and environment pops off the screen and has a great clean, crisp feel to it.

The soundtrack is also a highlight of the movie, headlined by artists like Ellie Goulding, Beyonce, and The Weekend.

The biggest problem with this movie is the boring story. Most people will see this movie for the sex, but people who are going in the hopes of finding a compelling, thought-provoking story will be very disappointed. Not once did I feel an attachment to the story, or any of the characters in it.

Also, the ending was poorly done, and was just another cliched cliffhanger that is, for some reason, required for the first movie of an inevitable trilogy.

2/5 grey, but somewhat juicy apples.

American Sniper Review: Bradley Cooper is the Man

Over the weekend, I had the pleasure to see the much-anticipated war movie, “American Sniper,” starring Bradley Cooper and directed by the legendary director/actor, Clint Eastwood. Watching the trailer to this movie, I assumed it would be an intense war movie that had plenty of explosions, gun fights, and yes, a lot of death. The most important thing going into the movie for me was would Eastwood be able to deliver a film that captured the terror and reality of war itself.

I am very happy to say that Eastwood does just that, and while American Sniper is no Saving Private Ryan, it is still a very well directed and acted war movie.

The star of the movie is hands-down Bradley Cooper. The actor has sure come a long way since being the pretty boy in the “Hangover” trilogy, huh? His roles in “Silver Linings Playbook,” “American Hustle,” and yes, the voice work for Rocket Raccoon in the summer blockbuster “Guardians of the Galaxy” have pushed Cooper up my list for favorite current actor.

Cooper plays a wannabe cowboy who decides to enter the Navy Seals and hone his skills as an elite sniper for the U.S. military. His character goes through a major transformation throughout the course of the movie, and Cooper does an excellent job conveying his inner struggle as he continues to realize the effects war can have on the soldiers involved. The result is a role that could very well earn Cooper a nomination for best actor in next year’s Oscars.

The romance between Cooper and actress Sienna Miller worked for me in this movie, and while things move pretty fast for the couple, I never felt as if it was being rushed. The portrayal of their relationship felt natural, and I felt sympathetic to both sides.

The tone of this movie was well done by Eastwood, as the movie had me on the edge of my seat during particular moments. The reality and cruelty of war is visualized respectfully as well much like another one of my favorite war movies, Lone Survivor. The enemy the American soldiers are just that; the enemy. However, the film doesn’t toot the USA horn and portray all of the middle citizens to be this evil entity. Evil surely exists, but there are plenty of innocent people trapped within the situation, and the film does a good job in showing that side as well.

One of my only gripes with the movie is the the side characters. Honestly, the only characters I cared about were Cooper and Miller. Besides them, nobody really brought anything special or memorable to the table.

Also, the fact that Cooper is portraying a military “legend” in Chris Kyle is fine, but he is referred to as “legend” a lot throughout the movie, and it gets a little stale by the film’s climax. Perhaps that was actually how other soldier interacted with the real Kyle, but it became a little to excessive in the movie.

Other than those two things, I really enjoyed American Sniper and Eastwood’s direction. It’s a great portrayal of the struggle war has on the people and soldiers involved, and Bradley Cooper knocks it out of the park.

4/5 delicious, blood-red apples.

Most Anticipated Movies For 2015

2014 was a fantastic years for movies. The types of successful movies varied, with big, successful blockbusters and low budget indie flicks captivating audiences around the world. Now that 2014 is over, here are my top five most anticipated movies for 2015.

5. Chappie: “Chappie” will mark director Neil Blomkamp’s third sc-fi installment, following the very successful “District 9” and the solid “Elysium.” Blomkamp’s visual style is what I like most about his films, as both “District 9” and “Elysium” both had some of the best visuals I have seen in any movie. “Chappie” will follow a robot who has become the adopted son in a “dysfunctional” family. I anticipate a heartfelt tale of a robot trying to find it’s niche in a human society, and I will not be surprised if Blomkamp is able to suck a couple of tears from audiences’ eyes.

4. The Hateful Eight: Quentin Tarantino directing this film is more than enough to land this movie on my list. I was a huge fan of “Django Unchained,” and I’m hopeful that we will get more of the same from Tarantino’s latest installment. Samuel L. Jackson and Tim Roth, both favorites of Tarantino’s will star in the movie, but so will Channing Tatum. As a fan of Tatum, I am very excited to see how he will perform under Tarantino’s direction.

3. Jurassic World: The original Jurassic Park trilogy consists of one classic movie, one solid movie, and one disaster. “Jurassic Park 3” left a bad taste in the franchise’s fan’s mouths, and I’m hopeful that Jurassic World will get the Jurassic Park franchise back on the right track. Chris Pratt will be starring in the film as a man who is tasked to hunt down a new, genetically enhanced dinosaur that is loose in the film’s newest dinosaur amusement park. My biggest concern with the film is Pratt’s character; will he be able to pull off a more serious character like the trailers are portraying him as? He was able to pull off a somewhat serious, but more goofy role in “Guardians of the Galaxy,” but it looks as if this role will require a more serious performance from Pratt. Anyway, I am cautiously optimistic, but extremely excited for this film to hit theaters.

2. Star Wars: Episode VII-The Force Awakens: The last time the “Star Wars” franchise was in theaters, it was wrapping up one of the most disappointing trilogies of all time. This time around, JJ Abrams is at the helm as director, and I am very confident that he will breathe life back into this cherished franchise. He has proven that he is fully capable of pulling off a great sci-fi movie with his “Star Trek” movies, and as a big fan of the “Star Wars” franchise, I’m sure he will do everything he can to make this movie the best it can be.

1. Avengers: Age of Ultron: Seeing “The Avengers” in Theaters back in 2012 was, and still is the best time I have ever had at the movies. The film had everything a good movie, let alone a comic book movie, should have; epic action, drama, comedy, and compelling characters. With the all-star cast from the first film returning, and new additions such as Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Elizabeth Olsen, Marvel’s newest addition to The Avenger’s saga is shaping up to be as good, if not better than the first film. 

Of course, there are plenty of other potentially great movies coming out in 2015. These, however, are my most anticipated movies of the year. Do yourselves a favor and go see each of these films. This is shaping up to be another great year for movies.

Top Five Most Anticipated Movies for the Fall

With the summer movie season officially over (and what a summer it was), here’s my top five most anticipated movies for the fall! Oh, and because I’m so cool, I included the release dates and trailers for each.

 

5. The Skeleton Twins (September 12th)

Starring Kristen Wiig and Bill Hader with supporting actors Luke Wilson and Ty Burrell, The Skeleton Twins is shaping up to be one of the funniest movies this fall. The hilarious former SNL duo reunite as a brother and sister who come back together after being apart for 10 years. The film has already gotten high praise, and won best screenplay at the Sundance Film Festival this year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhULZJDXLaE

 

 

4. Nightcrawler (October 31st)

Releasing on Halloween, Nightcrawler looks like it could be one of the more unsettling movies this fall. Jake Gyllenhaal plays a freelance crime journalist, who, as the trailer shows, is a little mentally unstable. Bringing back flashes of Christian Bale’s performance in American Psycho, Gyllenhaal could get some serious Oscar consideration, and that’s just from watching the trailer. Also, the phrase “You have to make the money to buy a ticket” will be stuck in my head for a while.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lEdwqwOttg#t=76

 

 

3. Birdman (October 17th)

Birdman is a black comedy about a washed-up actor who used to play a superhero, and is now struggling in the later years of his career. The hilarious thing is that the film stars Michael Keaton, who used to play a superhero himself back in the day when he played Batman. With an all-star cast including Emma Stone, Edward Norton, Naomi Watts, and Zach Galifianakis, Birdman is one of the more intriguing films coming out this fall.

 

 

2. Foxcatcher (November 14th)

The unlikely pairing of Channing Tatum and Steve Carrell should already have you interested in this film, but Foxcatcher just looks flat-out good. Tatum, who has done drama in the past, but is better known for his role in the Jump Street movies, will have a chance to flex his dramatic muscle alongside Carrell, who seems a little miscast in this role. However, early reviews are saying that Carell excels in the dramatic role. Based on a true story, I expect Foxcatcher to get some serious Oscar buzz following its release.

 

 

1. Interstellar (November 7th)

Christopher Nolan and Matthew McConaughey. That should be all you need to hear for you to want to see this movie. Directing his first movie since the conclusion of his Dark Knight Trilogy, Nolan die-hards will be flocking to see this movie, and why not? Has the guy ever directed a movie that wasn’t awesome? Interstellar also has McConaughey in the prime of his career going for it. With a big, ambitious plot involving space travel and the lives of the human race in the balance, Interstellar is my most anticipated movie of the fall season.

The Giver Review

 

This year has been the year of the novel to film adaptation. Some have been successful (Fault in our Stars), others not so successful (Divergent).

The trend continues with The Giver, a children’s novel written in 1993 by Lois Lowry. As was with a lot of other kids, I read this novel back in 5th grade, and I was a fan of it.

However, the film adaptation was not nearly as interesting as I remember the book being.

The premise is simple; A community of people exist in a utopian society where the idea of “sameness” is enforced so that there is no jealousy or conflict. Injections that each person is required to take every morning makes sure they stay emotionless, and everyone is assigned a job instead of choosing one they want. Jonas, the novel and film’s protagonist, is assigned a job as the “receiver of memory.” This means that he is able to receive memories from the past from the man known as The Giver. As Jonas learns more and more about the past and what his society is missing, he becomes conflicted, and wants things to go back to the way they were in the memories.

The film is directed by Phillip Noyce, and stars Jeff Bridges, Meryl Streep, Brenton Thwaites, and a bunch of uninteresting characters.

Apparently, Bridges has been trying to get this film made for the past 20 years, and his performance shows it. He is the real standout, as his character of The Giver is far and away the most interesting person on screen.

The usually great Streep does what she can with the material she’s given, but she was surprisingly uninteresting. I actually found Thwaites’ character of Jonas to be more interesting than Streep’s, a rare accomplishment indeed.

Besides those three characters, the film has nothing left to offer in the form of characters. Thwaites’ love interest is easy on the eyes, but she is dull overall. The same goes for Thwaites’ friend, Asher. However, I can’t blame the actors really, as they were probably directed to act dull since they’re supposed to be emotionless. Perhaps they could have acted a little less dull? Anyway, having so many characters like that can work in a book, but not a movie.

The biggest problem besides the dull characters was that the film felt rushed, and as a result, the ideas in it aren’t as fleshed out as they were in the book. There’s some heavy material in this movie. Imagine a society that has never experienced pain, loss, love, and true joy? These are ideas that could have made this movie great if they were fleshed out just a little bit more.

Bridges’ performance as The Giver saves this film from being a total train wreck, but the abundance of dull story telling and characters comes back to bite another novel-to-film adaptation in the ass.

So how do you like them apples? These apples brought me back to my childhood, but they left a a sour taste in my mouth. There were good bites here and there, but overall they tasted pretty dull.

2/5 dull and sour apples