WTWTW (8/31/13)

The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

★★★ ½ (Cole & Jesse)

In 2005, director Christopher Nolan took the reins from Joel Schumacher and rebooted, better yet reinvented, the Batman franchise. Where as Schumacher played it goofy, flashy, and trashy (his films looked a lot like actual cartoons) with Batman Forever (1995) and Batman & Robin (1997), Nolan creates a denser, deeper, and more intelligent series of films this time around. The pinnacle of all them belongs to the final film in his trilogy which is The Dark Knight Rises. With an epic dose of storytelling, a villain that is absolutely menacing (Tom Hardy as the gas masked wearing Bane), and a compelling, unexpected way of wrapping everything up, this Dark Knight, in my opinion (it's a bold statement but I'm going with it), ultimately surpasses the much beloved 2008 vehicle. This was on my list for the best films of 2012. And despite the fact that its almost three hours long, you'll probably never need to look at your watch.

Cost: $1.20 (per day) at Redbox

MPAA Rating: PG-13

Two for the Money (2005)

★★★ (Jesse)

Two for the Money is a 2005 release that dives head first into the volatile world of sports gambling. Our tour guides: Walter Abrams (played by Al Pacino, who chews a lot of scenery here) as an owner of a sports consulting operation and Brandon Lang (Matthew McConaughey), a former college football star turned sports handicapper, who acts as Walter's innocent protege. What starts off as a high energy romp turns dark and restless. Granted, this is not your ordinary sports flick. Its non-linear storytelling works because of the performances (Rene Russo is also effective in a supporting role as Pacino's character's wife). If you revel in the idea of Pacino playing himself, this is a must see. D. J. Caruso (The Salton Sea) directs. Dan Gilroy (Freejack) penned the script.

Available at your local video store
MPAA Rating: R

Natural Born Killers (1994)

★★★ (Cole) ~ ★★ ½ (Jesse)

With countless masterfully crafted, ingenious underlying messages and thought provoking satires, Natural Born Killers is a movie that is something to admire. No director other than Oliver Stone himself could’ve made this violent, pungent drama that remains to be one of the least subtle films of all time. Savagery (keep in mind, Quentin Tarantino scripted) and surrealistic editing takes control of the film in large part, which is why it can be relatively unenjoyable to watch at times, but when it comes down to it, this is a fine work of art. The performances, by Juliette Lewis and Woody Harrelson are really something else to marvel at. While some with true vision see the film as an intellectual masterpiece (I’m among them), others may see the movie as overkill and hogwash. The beauty of this picture is that it caters to no audience. It lets the viewers judge for themselves; my advice to you as the viewer is take in a viewing and formulate a thoughtful opinion knowing that the movie has no predispositions. You can never go wrong by entrusting director Stone with your precious moviegoing time.

Available on Netflix Instant Streaming
MPAA Rating: R

Scent of a Woman (1992)

★★★ ½ (Cole) ~ ★★★ (Jesse)

In a movie that clocks in at almost three hours of running time, Al Pacino may very well be the biggest, boldest highlight because of how powerful he plays his role of the old man who wants to see the city again. Scent of a Woman is a movie for the ages because of how tender the material is, and how delicate it is as a whole. It tells a touching story that is rarely thought about and, even more seldom than that, exercised. I can guarantee that you will leave this film with a good feeling.

Free on Xfinity On Demand
MPAA Rating: R

-All Reviews Written by Cole Pollyea & Jesse Burleson

YOU'RE NEXT

Jesse's Rating: ★★★

Director: Adam Wingard
Year: 2011
Cast: Sharni Vinson, Joe Swanberg, AJ Bowen
Genre: Comedy/Horror/Thriller
MPAA Rating: R

       With smidgens of background music straight out of a 1980's John Hughes film and villains with a penchant for killing defenseless human beings by way of crossbows, You're Next exhibits a new and fresh perspective on the horror/slasher genre. Now I'm saying this based on my observation of the movie's second half. The last 45 minutes surprised me and I consider them very effective. The first half, well, it resembles one of the weaker Friday the 13th sequels coupled with residue from the meaningless pile of junk that is The Strangers (2008) ("Next" plays like a wiser, more intelligent version of the said movie). At 96 fast paced minutes, You're Next isn't monumentally scary. In fact, it's a horror flick that plays more like a thriller. Does that make it less palatable? No way. Truth be told, this is an exercise that delivers a couple of nifty twists and turns that help it rise above the ordinary. Now I can't reveal these twists (nor would I want to) but I do know this: I couldn't recommend "Next" without them. I also can't divulge who the character is that turns out to be the reluctant heroine. If you choose to take in a viewing, you'll find out for yourself that this person is a true survivalist that kinda came out of nowhere. And as the perceptive critic that I always try to be, I initially didn't pick up on it.

        Harboring actors/actresses that I've never seen in a film before and taking place in I figured the middle of nowhere (of course), You're Next has a premise that goes like this: a rich family consisting of a husband, wife, and four children (all with significant others) venture out to a remote vacation home (it's not revealed where but I found out that filming took place in Columbia, Missouri) for a sort of rekindling (the vibe I get is that they haven't seen each other in quite some time). This family doesn't know it yet, but they are being watched and are to be eventually hunted down by henchman wearing creepy masks that resemble, I guess, bunny rabbits. What begins from that moment on is a relentless rush of terror that doesn't let up. If you like the sight of blood, "Next" will not disappoint. After I left the theater, I wondered, budget wise, how much money was shelled out for all those gallons of red dye corn syrup.

        Despite that fact that this flick works, there is still something that kinda irked me about You're Next: once this thing comes to a close, there is a gaping hole evident in the storyline that concerns the antagonists' motivations. It seems like the script wasn't thought out too much, but instead invented to entertain, despite the fact that moviegoers passionate about strong writing will discover the apparent flaw.

      When it's all said and done, though, You're Next has some decent acting (much better than your standard horror fare with virtual unknowns in the cast), satisfying direction for most of the way (there are some scenes with a sizable amount of jittery camerawork that I could've done without), and an effective 180 degree turn in terms of what you thought you knew about some of the characters. Then there's the ending. It's been done a few times before with other films of this nature. It's equally disturbing and funny. Overall, this is not a horror classic that's going to set the world on fire, but it succeeds in trying to add a spark to what I believe to be a tired, over-the-hill genre of filmmaking. Regardless, this gets a recommendation from me and it's the "next" movie you should take in during these dog days of August.

-Written by Jesse Burleson & Cole Pollyea

CLOCKERS

Jesse's Rating: ★★★

Cole's Rating: ★★★

Director: Spike Lee
Year: 1995
Cast: Harvey Keitel, Mekhi Phifer, Delroy Lindo
Genre: Crime/Drama/Mystery
MPAA Rating: R

        In the fall of 1995, I found myself in the city of Grand Rapids, Michigan (on a weekend leave from college) highly anticipating the newest Spike Lee film. Later that night, I viewed it in a large theater with possibly 20-25 screens. There were other action films, comedies, and dramas that I could have chosen from, but I had to see Lee's latest outing. He was a controversial director back then and still reins as one today. In the 90's, his films were a bit more mainstream than they are now. To me, they were like events. And after watching the trailer for Clockers, I knew I had to get to the multiplex right away (opening night was when I attended a screening). Slightly disjointed, messy at times, yet totally absorbing, Clockers remains one of Spike Lee's most interesting and most forceful cinematic feats. It holds a varied cast of actors known and unknown (I'm just speculating, but I think a lot of the people on screen were plucked off the street without any acting experience thus adding to the film's realism), a plethora of varied styles of directing, a fantastic opening credit sequence, and a massive need to get its message across. With most of Spike's films, you generally see a sort of sporadic narrative. Clockers has this but it still manages to be a solid helping from the Brooklyn-rooted director.

        Produced by legendary filmmaker Martin Scorsese and based on a novel of the same name by Richard Price (he wrote the screenplay as well), Clockers tells the story of a small-time drug dealer named Ronald "Strike" Dunham (played by Mekhi Phifer who, at the time, had never acted in a film before and got picked out of 1,000 people in an open casting call). He works with a bunch of other fellow dealers who are labeled "clockers" (they are basically 24 hour drug pushers). When "Strike"'s brother (Victor Dunham played by Isaiah Washington) is accused and confesses (in self defense) to murdering one of "Strike's" rival dealers working at a fast food restaurant, "Strike" is then somehow caught up in the whole investigation. He's pulled in different directions and has to take sides based on his relentless pursuers being a morally concerned cop (Rocco Klein played by Harvey Keitel who gives a Harvey Keitel-like performance) and a parasitic drug lord (Oscar caliber stuff from Delroy Lindo as Rodney Little). A couple of things to note about this film: the acting by the entire cast down to the bit players, the supporting players, and the leads is sensational in every way. Second: the drug solicitation scenes that are featured at various intervals are disturbingly real and authentic. As you view them, it feels less like you're watching a movie and more like you're experiencing real life as it happens.

        Registering at a running time of just over 2 hours, it's safe to say that there is a lot of movie to take in with Clockers. This vehicle is a character study, a drug flick, and a murder mystery all in one. You have a meaty script by Richard Price (he wrote The Color of Money and Ransom), a searing musical score from Terrence Blanchard (he's Lee's right hand man when it comes to musical scores), and an extremely dark-hued look from cinematographer Malik Hassan Sayeed. In essence, Spike Lee has every resource possible to flex his directorial wings. This, in my mind, is one of the strongest films he has made as a director. His technique is exuberant. You get a lot of slow motion scenes (set to music, of course), a shot that pans over the view of one of the film's most pivotal moments (a protective murder of a burnt out drug addict by a young boy), some solid jump cuts (at the beginning during one of the drug deals), and high energy flashbacks that are quick and to the point. A lot of the film's best sequences are not only set to Blanchard's score, but also to a mixed pop soundtrack with songs from Seal, Crooklyn Dodgers, Chaka Khan, and Rebelz of Authority.

        Clockers is a heavy urban crime drama with powerfully realized, individual scenes. It is, without a doubt, a solid interpretation of Lee's rather large body of work. He tries hard to be a good storyteller and sometimes slips a bit. But somehow, someway, he still gets the job done here. The film's last ten minutes, which feel subdued and project a bit of a relief from all the chaos that came before it, channel a feeling of radiant hope. This reassures the viewer that an exercise this depressing and melodic can still end on a positive note. With that said, Clockers, for me, was definitely worth a re-viewing. It's a Spike Lee Joint that "clocks in" as something I would wholeheartedly recommend. 

-Written by Jesse Burleson

Cole's Thoughts: Spike Lee, who is known for his controversial and therefore ambitious filmmaking, made a film based whole-heartedly (there is not a shred of hesitance sensed here) in and about the "projects" and the trouble that ensues while growing up/living there in 1995. With a cast that lets us down not for one scene and a script that is accurate straight from the get go, the only thing that I have to complain about is how Lee tries to be too much of a storyteller when, in reality, he should exercise his ability to capture, well, reality (which he excels at). He really drives the point that crime doesn't pay home here, and at one point in the film, it becomes annoying and relatively unbearable. But when you have a fitted musical score, some applaud-worthy camerawork, a fundamentally good story, and a cast that really does some fine work, you get a good, classic piece of filmmaking like Clockers.

Cole's Take On: ELYSIUM

Cole's Rating: ★★★ ½
Jesse's Rating: ★★★ ½

Director: Neill Blomkamp 

Year: 2013

Cast: Matt Damon, Jodie Foster, Alice Braga

Genre: Action/Drama/Sci-fi

MPAA Rating: R

        ELYSIUM is probably the most violent, down-and-dirty sci-fi movie that I’ve ever laid my eyes on. Sometimes having a script riddled with visceral action scenes and gruesome brutality is a misstep because the movie lacks a strong cast and good writing to carry them out, or the movie incorporates them to consume time (to distract the viewer from the other flaws); but that’s not the case here. With ELYSIUM, you get actors that really take control of the film and a script that’s right on. Matt Damon is truly the actor best fitted to the role at hand (as he channels some of his inner Jason Bourne). He can deliver on all of the required aspects of the performance: being able to convey biting humor, being able to commit emotionally touching behaviors of sentimentality, and having the ability to be totally awesome, all the while being a little hard edged.

        Damon plays Max, a hard worker (with little payoff) in a post-apocalyptic world where the rich get to blast off to live in wealth on a privileged planet called Elysium, while the poor stay to suffer. When he is subjected to an extremely lethal amount of radiation at his job, he is given five days to live. Then, he decides that he will do whatever it takes to get up to Elysium, where he can be healed. The whole movie is very thought provoking because of the different themes and ideas it expresses through character relationships and magnificent production design (thanks to the well done screenplay). Messages about greed and poverty are displayed to the point where one may think they are watching a sci-fi version of WALL STREET. “Money never sleeps”, right? I don’t know about that, but I’m sure that you won’t while you’re watching this flick.

        ELYSIUM is a great film. So far this year, I’d say it’s the second best (behind THE GREAT GATSBY). Something interesting to note about my praise of this film is that I’m not even a big fan of sci-fi, but this movie surprised me. It’s a perfect way to escape reality: enter a dark movie theater and witness writer-director Neill Blomkamp work his magic on the silver screen. He’s done it before, he’ll do it again, and I guarantee that his current achievement will make you appreciate our world a little bit more. If not for the quality of our living, then for the quality of filmmaking that we can be exposed to.

-Written by Cole Pollyea

Click HERE For Jesse's Review

Jesse's Take On: ELYSIUM

Jesse's Rating: ★★★ ½
Cole's Rating: ★★★ ½

Director: Neill Blomkamp 

Year: 2013

Cast: Matt Damon, Jodie Foster, Alice Braga

Genre: Action/Drama/Sci-fi

MPAA Rating: R

        With a somewhat original and visionary take on the sci-fi genre, Elysium gave me the ultimate spine-tingling feeling I've been hoping for in a summer movie. This flick has elements of other science fiction fare, but it doesn't try to copy them; it just tries to add new perspectives. Director Neill Blomkamp (he shot the Academy Award nominated District 9) has a unique style all his own. He likes to bring a sort of dirty, non-pristine look to his films (not exactly the same but in a similar vein to what Ridley Scott did with Alien). And at the same time, the cinematography is undoubtedly top notch. Being that Blomkamp is from South Africa, the film I'm reviewing, along with District 9, has the look and feel of one of its cities which is Johannesburg. So in a rare feat these days, Elysium combines, effectively, the complicated elements of futuristic culture with stellar action sequences. Yes, this exercise can sometimes lose a little focus with its sort of jumbled storyline, but by the last half hour, everything seems to come together just fine. As I viewed this picture with its hair raising, horn-filled musical score, I was reminded (in a lightweight sort of way) of two classic films: The Road Warrior and Blade Runner. Again, Elysium does not copy off these films by any means. But it serves as a worthy companion to both of them (it has the distinction of feeling like a true dystopian flick and a post apocalyptic flick like the aforementioned movies).

        Giving star Matt Damon a deglamorizing role to sink his teeth into, Elysium takes place in the year 2154. The planet has become split up into two completely different worlds. A beautiful space station called Elysium (of course), is tailor made for the wealthy and disease free. Then there is earth, a now poor, overly populated slum where the order that exists, projects misery to everyone living there. Damon's character (Max Da Costa) is propelled to take on a mission that might possibly bring the two worlds together and provide uniform equality. Here's the dilemma: he's got to get past a cold, icy Secretary of Defense (Jessica Delacourt played stiffly by Jodie Foster) and John Carlyle (William Fichtner), a misguided CEO of the Armadyne corporation (they built Elysium). I'm not going to give anything more away. You just have to know that Elysium's plot doesn't quite kick in immediately. You just have to be patient and let this concoction take you for a ride.

        Harboring a solid enough cast, I would only consider Jodie Foster to be Elysium's weak link. She is a great actress, no doubt about it, but this is not the Jody Foster we know and love. Saddled with an unnatural, uncomfortable screen presence and a silly accent (I guess it was British, but I could be wrong), this might be one of the worst performances she has ever given in her 40-plus year career. On the other end of the spectrum, there's Damon. I can say, with confidence, that he has found the perfect role to enhance his attributes as a rough and rugged actor (the image of him firing machine guns in slow motion is pretty darn cool). He gets totally put through the wringer in this slam bang actioner, and he indelibly shines throughout (his character reminded me of Jason Bourne but more vulnerable and living in the near distant future instead of present day).  

        With summer sort of coming to a close, I'm glad I took in a screening of Elysium. It's a refreshing and welcoming surprise considering what's been out lately at your local multiplex (in August, there hasn't been anything to write home about, that's my report). In a sense, this is a cunning, breathtaking, challenging, and exhilarating sci-fi trip par excellence. I truly want to see it again.

-Written by Jesse Burleson

Click HERE For Cole's Review

FROM DUSK TILL DAWN

Cole's Rating: ★★★

Jesse's Rating: ★★ ½

Director: Robert Rodriguez 
Year: 1996
Cast: George Clooney, Harvey Keitel, Quentin Tarantino, Juliette Lewis
Genre: Action/Crime/Horror
MPAA Rating: R

        From Dusk Till Dawn is, by no means, a great film. In fact, I’d barely call it a good one. There are two reasons I’m recommending it, and I’ll bet you can guess why. Here’s a hint: Mr. Tarantino has his name on it. Now, he didn’t direct; Robert Rodriguez did, but Tarantino wrote and acted. With these two’s history, you know that when they put their heads together, the result isn’t going to be subtle or unnoticed. In fact, those are the last adjectives I would use to describe their 90’s gorefest because the first thing that comes to mind when I think of the film is silly, then I have to force myself to recall the first 45 minutes (before the movie took a turn for the worst).

        And if you haven’t guessed by now, the first thing that makes this movie so enjoyable is the cast. Tarantino’s movies never lack strong actors/actresses, and From Dusk Till Dawn is no exception. Harvey Keitel plays the father of two (Juliette Lewis being one) who are kidnapped by notorious robbers, played by George Clooney and Quentin Tarantino himself. I won’t disclose anymore, but if you know of the film, then I’m sure you can connect the dots on where it heads. I never said I hated the twist (it ends up working in a sense), but with how great everything prior to this plot turn was set up, this movie could be a four-star slam dunk. This assembly of the veteran actors/actresses in the film make the first half of the movie seem like Best Picture worthy stuff, and they even manage to make the second half bearable.

        The other factor that makes this recommendable and enjoyable is the writing (particularly the screenplay). Every scene is taken full advantage of, throwing in humor, intensity, engagement, and a sense of likability to the characters (most), ultimately making this a treat to fall subject to the intrigue that writers Robert Kurtzman and Quentin Tarantino so successfully create. The movie sets itself up very nicely. But then it’s the story that makes you go, “ohhhhh, that’s where this was heading”. (No positive connotation meant). It turns a contender with Reservoir Dogs into a film that Leonard Maltin called “Natural Born Vampires”. 

        If you’re looking for a fun movie, look no further. If you are looking for a masterpiece, look elsewhere. If you are a film buff, you might get a kick out of some of the vibrant writing seen throughout. If you dig cheesed out Hollywood endings, go see World War Z. From Dusk Till Dawn’s conclusion is a knockout!

-Written by Cole Pollyea

Jesse’s Thoughts: From Dusk Till Dawn plays like two different flicks all together. The first half is a kidnapping/road movie complete with mediocre acting (George Clooney tries way too hard and Quentin Tarantino, well he's a better director than an actor) and a script that isn't quite as sharp as what Tarantino's has been known to put out. The second half is a ferocious battle between humans and bloodthirsty vampires. For me, the second half is slightly better. In the end though, it's a segment that's more stylish than anything else. Back in 1996, From Dusk Till Dawn was supposed to be Clooney's first true big screen debut (it coincided with his successful E.R. show). Unfortunately, it comes off more as a slight misfire despite Robert Rodriquez's capable direction and some effectively campy special effects. In general, this film is uneven and the vampire sequences which are meant to scare you senseless don't take themselves seriously. I put the blame on the cast because they come off as goofballs. Chalk this one up as a mixed review from me. From what I understand, this movie spawned some sequels. I guess you could call the next installment "From Bad To Worse".

WTWTW (8/16/13)

What To Watch This Weekend (8/16/13)

The River Wild (1994)

★★★ (Cole & Jesse)

Currently, on Free Movies on Xfinity On Demand, lies a hidden gem: a more subtle, exciting film about river rafting (more subtle in comparison to Deliverance, a movie of similar happenings). It boasts a cast of veteran actors (Kevin Bacon, Meryl Streep, and John C. Reilly (in his best role)), and each one gives an utterly convincing and frequently powerful performance. Yes, it’s a PG-13 thriller, so there are a few minor plot holes, but nothing that will stop you from savoring every second of this well crafted, involving, and unmistakably enjoyable motion picture that can and should be viewed by a family (with kids that are at least eight/nine) on a movie night that won’t disappoint.

Free on Xfinity On Demand 
MPAA Rating: PG-13

Bringing Out The Dead (1999)

★★★ (Jesse)

In the late 90's, Nicolas Cage made it his dream to emerge as a bona fide action star. When Martin Scorsese got on board to helm his latest flick, the former Oscar winner decided to take a short break. Bringing Out the Dead is a nightmarish drama about anxiety ridden Manhatten ambulance paramedics. If you've viewed most of Scorsese's work, you'll know that his best films are ones that don't have much of a plot. This claustrophobic caricature of a movie truly hammers that notion home. It has the blatant feel of Marty's most comfortable attributes. All the essential trademarks are evident (unique camerawork, stellar soundtrack, rapid editing) and Cage (as paramedic Frank Pierce) delivers a performance that suggests that he's tailor made for his role. This is definitely one of the top ten best films of 1999.

Available on Netflix Instant Streaming
MPAA Rating: R

The Bourne Legacy (2012)

★★★ (Jesse)

Jeremy Renner takes the reins from Matt Damon in this entertaining fourth Bourne entry that, in my mind, resembles the first film in the series (The Bourne Identity). He doesn't play the actual character of Jason Bourne. It's more like a subdued version. In fact, Renner plays CIA agent Aaron Cross. He's being hunted down based on the previous actions of  Bourne (in the previous 3 films of course). Bottom line: Renner steps into the lead role with no trouble at all. He easily handles the physical demands as well (the fights are very well choreographed and they're as good as anything in the previous outings). Ultimately, this is a satisfying entry and based on the popularity of these films, a 5th one may be on the way. I have one question though: because Renner is not Bourne, are the studio execs gonna keep tying that name to the series? 

Available at Redbox (Cost: $1.20 Per Day)
MPAA Rating: PG-13

Lethal Weapon (1987)

★★★★ (Jesse) ~ ★★★ (Cole)

With visceral, breathtaking action sequences and a shockingly good performance from Aussie bred Mel Gibson, Lethal Weapon stands as possibly the greatest buddy cop film ever made. After three star making performances in the Mad Max movies, Gibson (as suicidal cop Martin Riggs) built a whole new character niche for himself here. He is paired with the perfectly cast Danny Glover (L.A.P.D. Sergeant Roger Murtaugh) and the two of them become involved in taking down a ruthless drug dealer/murderer of the daughter of one of Murtaugh's closest friends. The very popular Lethal Weapon franchise went on to produce three more sequels. The fact that the first one stays away from the comedic element (this was overdone on the next 3 installments) makes it more atmospheric, more tension-filled, and vehemently more effective. Watch out for Gary Busey (a.k.a. Joshua) as a side villain who's pure, nasty fun. Richard Donner of The Goonies and Superman fame directs at a fast, workmanlike clip.

Available At Your Local Video Store

MPAA Rating: R

-All Reviews Written by Cole Pollyea & Jesse Burleson

WE'RE THE MILLERS

Jesse's Rating: ★★

Director: Rawson Marshall Thurber
Year: 2013
Cast: Jason Sudeikis, Jennifer Aniston, Emma Roberts
Genre: Comedy/Crime
MPAA Rating: R

        In terms of summer movies, August always seems to be the month when the most inferior products are put out. We're the Millers (the film I'm reviewing) is no exception. Masquerading as a laugh out loud comedy and coming off as only mildly amusing, this movie tells the story of David Burke (played by Jason Sudeikis who channels his inner Vince Vaughn), a "man child" pot dealer who, after trying to help a young homeless girl in distress, gets robbed of all his drugs and money (his bosses drugs/money as well). He then becomes indebted to his wealthy drug lord/longtime college friend Brad Gurdlinger (played by Ed Helms who, with a certain goofiness, give the film's best performance) for at least $40,000. In order for David to save his own life, he must get across the Mexican border and do a massive drug deal for Brad. If he succeeds in this task, he will pocket $100,000 for himself, his debt will be forgiven, and he'll go on to live another day. One problem: being searched for drugs at the border. Brad's solution: hire a fake family to make it look less suspicious while smuggling the merchandise back into the states. Helm's character states that it is just a smidge of pot (yeah right). In hindsight, this sounds like an interesting premise for a movie. It's just too bad that We're the Millers fails to satisfy. Yeah, it does seem original enough, but in the end, what you get is a borderline lousy road comedy that may force you to chuckle a few times here and there. Why? Because you probably paid $10 and felt obligated to get the most out your summer moviegoing experience (the audience that I sat with in the theater echoed this sentiment, you could tell).

       There are a few big misteps that latch on to "Millers". One is the fact that it's a drowned out laugh fest that tries way too hard to get someone to like it. Second, the film assumes that a bland comedic actor like Jason Sudeikis can carry a full length feature film in general (in certain segments of this monstrosity, he becomes massively unlikable). Third, Jennifer Aniston as the fake wife in the fake family can't pass in the film as an exotic dancer (there's a scene where she has to show off her moves to get out of danger/peril, but she can't dance and doesn't come off as flexible or, as the role requires, believable). Fourth, there is the constant use of ad-libbing/tired improvisation by the actors that takes hold of certain scenes thereby making them painfully worse. And finally, there is the obvious use of adding unnecessary character situations to keep the plot moving. An example would be a tarantula crawling up someone's pants and biting him in the "you know where". Trust me, this is not funny and it feels artificially simulated like everything else trying to pass off as pungent and laughable.

        One of the bright spots (along with Helms of course) is the addition of the fake son for David's fake family. His name is Kenny and he is played by the innocent looking, bright eyed British actor,Will Poulter. Does he give the greatest performance in world? Not exactly. But he looks and fits the part perfectly and becomes the only character you could root for, or even like (barely, mind you).

        In conclusion, We're the Millers comes off as crass, rude, and, for the most part, unfunny. With a lead actor that lacks solid comedic chops and a script that feels tired and all too familiar, it's an exercise you'd be better off staying away from (if you do choose to view this flick, avoid the outtakes at the end because they're even worse than the film itself). After this tired engine died, I thought to myself, "How glad I am that I don't live next door to 'The Millers'" (when you get to the end of the film, you'll understand).

-Written by Jesse Burleson

THE GAMBLER

Cole's Rating: ★★

Director: Karel Reisz

Year: 1974

Cast: James Caan, Paul Sorvino

Genre: Crime/Drama

MPAA Rating: R

        Imagine an amateur dart player put in a competition. His first dart gets on the board, but it’s far from a bullseye. The second misses, and sets the tone for the majority of the time spent shooting. Periodically throughout (and I mean very seldom), it hits the dartboard, but never getting closer than it did the first time. The Gambler is the cinematic equivalency of the described situation, and not only does the dart accuracy resemble the quality of filmmaking throughout the films duration, but also the level of engagement and resonation from scene to scene. It seems as if a minuscule amount thought was put into the script, and as a result, the movie gets the same on the receiving end after the credits roll.


        It’s justifiably a bad film because there’s no emotion in any of it. James Caan, while harnessing his generally talented screen presence, gives a one-note performance to match that of the movie itself: one-note. Gambling is bad. The question I asked when this winded down to a close was, “That’s it? That’s the best you got?”. Sounds like something you’d say while trash talking an inferior opponent in sports, right? Wrong, that’s what I say to/about movies that disappoint me to an incredible extent.

        Caan plays Axel, “The Gambler”, who gambles because he likes the idea that he may lose. He claims that there is no point on betting on a game he is sure about because that defeats the purpose of gambling in the first place. When he gets himself into $44,000 worth of debt to the mob, he borrows from his rich mother and gambles it all away. One problem with this movie is that it seems as if the script has a lack of understanding of the main character, or a compulsive gambler in general. By the time The Gambler reaches its closing scene, Axel is made out to be a despicable, loathsome person who cheats, lies, and takes advantage of other people, when in fact, he’s the victim who has an addiction that ruins lives. As the viewer, instead of wanting this poor soul to seek help, or for help to find him, I wanted to see this character leave the screen.

        I like James Caan. I’m still haunted by his passion and authoritative way he guided the screen in The Godfather. Now, I know that this movie was made in 1974, and it was shot in color, but if anything, Caan makes this feel like it’s in black and white. His performance is colorless, sluggish, and bland. The dart player did, however, conclude with a bang (getting it on the board again). Its conclusion may be the best thing about it because its realizing and clever, but ultimately, that stands alone. If you want my advice on whether or not to view this, I can say this: if you’re a person who appreciates a sense of understanding, resonation, and disturbance in a movie about a tortured soul, then I’d stay away from this film. If you’re a person who doesn’t require any of those things in the script, then you will probably enjoy a movie like The Gambler.

-Written by Cole Pollyea

SUMMER OF SAM

Jesse's Rating: ★★ ½

Director: Spike Lee

Year: 1999

Cast: John Leguizamo, Adrien Brody, Mira Sorvino

Genre: Crime/Drama/Romance

MPAA Rating: R

        In 1999, Spike Lee decided to direct a film based on a very hard hitting, true story. Depicting the events of the Son of Sam serial murders in New York City (summer of 1977), Summer of Sam periodically delves into the search and capture of famed murderer (dubbed the .44 Caliber Killer ) David Berkowitz. It also peeks into the lives of the people that inhabit one of the Bronx neighborhoods he was terrorizing. "Sam" carries with it a majestic sense of time and place. However, it packs in, very tightly, too many plot layers to go along with the central story. And the fact that this is all done in almost two and a half hours is a jaw-dropping miracle.

        Seeing this film for the first time in 5 years made me revert back to one of my favorite Spike Lee joints which would be Clockers. With shades of Martin Scorsese's Mean Streets and hints of Saturday Night Fever (especially the overhead shot in "Sam" of the two main characters entering a discotheque), Summer of Sam is similar in structure to Clockers.  But it's unable to juggle the plot points effectively like that 1995 film did. The reason: it could be the script which feels too abrasive and without thoughtfulness or ambiguity. Most of the characters talk in a racist manner with huge stereotypes to go along with it. Was that the culture of New Yorkers at the time? I'm not sure because I'm not from NYC and I was only 3 when these events took place. Regardless, this could create a rather large unlikability factor with the audience, an audience who invests their time to view this flick.

        In essence, Summer of Sam is the epitome of restless, scattershot filmmaking. Spike Lee has harbored this style ever since he burst onto the scene with 1986's She's Gotta Have It. Sometimes he gets away with it and sometimes he doesn't. But you can't fault him for directing films that feel alive and have a pulsating sense of urgency. With his "plot over plot over plot" way of doing things, he unfortunately gets a mixed review from me. Bottom line: "Sam" is a mess, but it's an ambitious mess with a couple of really powerful scenes that hint at what a great film this could have been (one of the best sequences is a fantastic montage of sights and sounds accompanied by the tune of The Who's "Baba O' Riley"). With this vehicle, you get a great soundtrack (a mix of classic rock from The Who and disco) and two edgy performances (John Leguizamo as Vinny and Mira Sorvino as Dionna) that highlight the strong points. Also, the appearance of real life columnist Jimmy Breslin (he received letters from the killer and narrates the beginning/ending of the movie) is a nice touch.

        But like I said earlier, "Sam" tries to include everything. You have plot elements such as the infidelity of Vinny in his marriage to Dionna, the glory of the 1977 New York Yankees, the supposed birth of the punk rock movement, and even the local mob joining the police to find the would be Son of Sam murderer. Let's be honest, Summer of Sam is not that bad of a movie. But it's way too cynical and ideological to be great. I'll leave you with this notion: in New York City, the summer of 77' was one of the hottest on record. After viewing Lee's exhausting, profanity laden marathon of a movie, you may feel just lukewarm.

-Written by Jesse Burleson

PERCY JACKSON: SEA OF MONSTERS

Cole's Rating: ★ ½

Director: Thor Freudenthal

Year: 2013

Cast: Logan Lerman, Alexandra Daddario, Brandon T. Jackson

Genre: Adventure/Family/Fantasy

MPAA Rating: PG

        Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters is the epitome of washed up, remedial, Hollywood sequels. That’s too bad because I thoroughly enjoyed the first one. I liked its introduction (to the modern day cinema world) of greek mythology, I thought it was plotted well, and I thought it was an overall thrilling experience. The characters were likable, as compared to what they are here: walking clichés.  There’s quite a few things that I could say that would sum up this movie, but I’ll say this: you know it’s bad when a CGI monster is making sexual inferences in a PG film.

        And that seemed to be the case for quite a few scenes/moments in this movie. Since the screenplay clearly lacked the ability to keep the movie afloat, the filmmakers decided to throw in some completely distasteful one-liners to lighten up the story (which is something that Percy Jackson and the Olympians: The Lightning Thief didn’t have to do). Right in the middle of a potentially good scene, they’d say something like: “I’m killin’ these shorts, didn’t you notice?”. Nope, I didn’t, I was too astonished at what was coming out of the actors’ mouths before that line (I found myself staring, jaw open, marveling at the incredibly inept writing).

        This film basically continues the adventures of the now cocky Percy Jackson, who, based on his prior excellence, believes that it is his calling to save the camp of the half-gods, to which he belongs. As the movie progresses, he becomes more and more unlikable, until I found myself desiring for his character to be put against the odds and not come out on top (to die). I know, call me a cynic. I’m no better than Neal Paige (haha), but that thought is as justifiable as any when the movie’s predictable conclusion arrives, which vexed my critical nature all too much.

        So why isn’t this an outright dud? Well, I continued to enjoy some of the greek mythological references made throughout, and there were a few scenes that caught my attention (in a good way, this time). With a summer full of bad sequels (this is no exception), let’s hope that there are a few more noteworthy follow ups to good movies as the year progresses; after all, asking the studio to stop making sequels is like saying that the Percy Jackson film series is a competitor with other younger audience fantasy movies like Harry Potter. As if!

-Written by Cole Pollyea

WTWTW (8-9-13)

What To Watch This Weekend

(8-9-13)

Django Unchained (2012)

★★★ (Cole)

        If you love movies, especially Tarantino’s later works (as compared to his 90’s productions), Django Unchained is quite a bit to bathe in—though there may be too much. Homage, vibrancy, and lots of blood can be found here in this spaghetti western that managed to reel in an Academy Award and a few other nominations, including Best Picture. See the full review for a more in depth look at this film.

MPAA Rating: R
Available on Xfinity On Demand ($4.99) & Redbox ($1.20 Per Day)

Snitch (2013)

★★★ (Jesse & Cole)

Dwayne Johnson takes a break from being an action star to take on a more complex role in the Ric Roman Waugh directed Snitch. As a concerned dad trying to get his son out of jail for being set up in a drug deal, Johnson (character is John Matthews) gives a serious, and uniquely controlled performance. It's his best to date and it shows that he is trying his darndest to emote as an actor. The film is a little outlandish and it times, extremely far-fetched but it does a great job of ratcheting up tension throughout. Watch for the harrowing conclusion involving a nail-biting semi-truck chase (complete with elements of The Road Warrior and The Fast and the Furious). So far in 2013, I have to say that this is one of the best films to be released. Susan Sarandon and Barry Pepper add to the strong cast. See the full review for a more in depth look at the film.

MPAA Rating: PG-13
Available at Redbox ($1.20 Per Day) & Xfinity On Demand ($4.99)

Beverly Hills Cop (1984)

★★★ ½ (Jesse)

As a Detroit police officer gone rouge trying to avenge the death of his best friend (he does this by venturing out to Beverly Hills, CA), Beverly Hills Cop is, by far, the best film to utilize Eddie Murphy's skills as a gifted comedic actor. In a role once rumored to helm Sylvester Stallone in the lead, Murphy as wisecracking detective Axel Foley, gives his best performance in, what I consider, his best movie to date. Expertly plotted and directed with controlled craftsmanship by Martin Brest (director of Scent of a Woman), this was a monster box office hit and it spawned 2 more sequels ("Cop II” is pretty solid but "Cop III" is the one you should skip). Watch for the scene where Foley makes a sort of off-duty arrest in a strip club. This is one of the more memorable moments in 80's cinema.

Available on Netflix Instant Streaming
MPAA Rating: R

Charlie Wilson’s War (2007)

★★★ ½ (Cole)

        Every member of the cast is more than ideal and every moment is savored in Charlie Wilson’s War, a movie that makes geopolitics supremely entertaining, more so than any other film I’ve ever seen. Between the sharp script and the nice, swift pacing, it’s impossible not to fall victim to the enjoyability of this film. I only wish that it could’ve been longer. Before overlooking this movie (because it’s a political film), know this: it will fool you if you have an attitude like that, undoubtedly!

MPAA Rating: R
Available at Your Local Video Store

-All Reviews Written by Cole Pollyea & Jesse Burleson