After The Credits: Spotlight

A really good investigative journalism film on the Catholic Church.

After The Credits: Concussion

Such a waste of an important opportunity at touching on head injuries.

After The Credits: Creed & The Rocky Universe

Rather than give my perspective to Creed, I decided to do a retrospective on the Rocky films as a supplement to the Creed film. I really shat on Rocky 5 in this audio review & think the first 2 films were a tad overrated compared to Rocky 3. Nevertheless, enjoy.

After The Credits: Victor Frankenstein

Really wanted to like this film, but it was a slow burn, throughout. While Daniel Radcliffe & James McAvoy tried here, the movie, ultimately, felt like a slog, at best.

Pros: The two leads, nice f/x work

Cons: 40 minutes aren't interesting

After The Credits: Spectre (Audio Movie Reviews)

I needed a couple of weeks before I decided on a clearer view of this film before I gave it a proper opinion, rather than to blab on. Spectre's a broken film that I somehow managed to enjoy. Considering that I had to suffer through the long middle, I think that's why the 3rd act felt weird. I gave it a 3.5 out of 5, but purely out of mercy, nothing else.

The Wanderer Speaks (The Film Wanderer Podcast)

Trying this podcasting thing again. This time, It'll be different, and a whole lot better.

Best in Movies 2014: 2. The Amazing Spider-Man 2

Directed by Marc Webb

Produced by Avi Arad & Matt Tolmach

Story by Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, Jeff Pinker & James Vanderbilt

Score by Hans Zimmer & The Magnificent Six

Cinematography by Dan Mindel

Distributed by Columbia Pictures (Sony)

      Don't adjust your perception with my ranking with Amazing Spider-Man 2. Seriously, this is not a drill. I hold this film in high regard, all things considering how people have felt with the direction of the character has taken. A couple of think-pieces nor a significant event at Sony is going encourage me to cave into the "franchise fatigue" talking points. In order to understand ASM2's plight, it all starts with Sony and their haphazardness for not having confidence in their true vision of the character. Then again, companies do desperate things to stay in the current. Before I go into appreciating the film proper, since this is a "best of" list, I have to excoriate Sony's ridiculous ideas for their once-promising universe in the "Amazing" series. When the company dealt with a hacking scandal of their own, one of the leaks discussed an Aunt May film, where Peter Parker's aunt, apparently, was once a spy in the eyes of the executives at Sony. Now, I'm not a "that wasn't in the comics" guy, but that's a big stretch for a side character who only offers her kander to Peter. Other properties, such as The Sinister Six, Black Cat, Venom are either on hold or don't exist in the plans for Marvel/Sony with their joint relationship into. With the license now co-produced by those two companies, the Spider-Man Cinematic Universe is all but dead. The movie, itself, is my favorite Spider-Man film until the newest one comes out in 2017. It's a shame that Andrew Garfield wasn't realized sooner, because, he's an excellent Spider-man, more so than Tobey Maguire. Yes, the basis of the film is structured as an origin story with a couple of new touches, but if this is the Spider-Man film we got back in the early 2000s, instead of the movie we actually got during that era, I think it might've been treated better, nostalgically. Now, I don't find it revolutionary or daunting; however, the film hits on some heavy emotional moments, like the way Gwen Stacy's death is depicted. Given its lasting appeal, or Sony's erratic vision, this was the Spider-Man film that I wanted for decades, for better or worse. I'll just have to live with the insults from people who weren't as enthralled as I was. 

The Stacy/Parker Connection

     From the get-go, you're pulled into the realm of the Stacy/Parker relationship. Of the things TASM 2 gets right, it's the love story. To be fair, it's more than just a situation of love, rather than just a buddy-buddy relationship. To the casual comic book fan, such as myself, we know the legend of Peter Parker and his heroics. Gwen Stacy's a compelling character, because she's not another damsel in distress needing to be saved, a tired cinema trope, to be honest. She doesn't mind doing heroics deeds for Spider-Man, even if he doesn't request for her help, so her safety can be assured. She wants to help defeat Electro? Check. Tips on Battery overcharges? Check. Isn't afraid of consequences? Big Check. It isn't so much that Gwen is dependent on becoming something meant to be revered, it's that she doesn't allow some of the people in her life to control destiny. As for Peter, well, he doesn't want her to be harmed at all. Typically, he doesn't want anyone to be harmed, since, we know that a big character trait about Spider-Man is on the impact of losing a significant other. Him being a significant level of responsibility for allowing that to happen. What makes Andrew Garfield & Emma Stone's roles impactful is, you believe they are these characters, because, they work so well together, regardless of their off-screen relationship. It's what makes the tumultuous demise of Gwen Stacy all the more heartbreaking during Spider-Man's fight in the clock tower with the Green Goblin. Despite all of his actions to keep her safe, something grim was bound to happen during the course of the film, we just didn't expect it to be so wretched. They have that innate ability to engage the audience without it all feeling like a derivative of the older films that tried to add the varying ranges of drama, comedy & action, but waned over time. At least, in this iteration, character development between the two was superb. 

Electro

     When Marc Webb selected Jamie Foxx to play Electro, I didn't have any concerns about his approach to him. Some seemed to be resentful to the fact that, Foxx might not be up for the role or nerds would slam his performance because it represented a significant change for how, perhaps, he was represented in the comics. I think if they went with the classic yellow and green spandex, we'd probably  more scrutiny compared to what it received beforehand. His Max Dillon comes across as crazed & needy. A man with smart ideas for Oscorp, but he never gets the credit for his products. Once he's picked on, he has these thoughts in his head of what he'd like to do those who mess with him, but he doesn't do anything to them. Of course, when he gets his powers from an accident, he's unsure of the power he gains (no pun intended) and when feels Spider-Man turned on him, as a result of a Sniper fire, when NYPD attempted to neutralize Max. Electro's also interesting since it feels like a sociopath surrounded by people who don't like him. The usage of Pharrell's voice to add to Max's instability adds another layer to him. 

The Future of Spider-Man Movies/Closing

     

     With Sony feelings a ton of uncertainty from fans & critics from the last film, they did the very thing to revitalize their franchise player, put him in the MCU along side Marvel Studios other characters. Also, Andrew Garfield will no longer be the webhead in later installments of the series, since Marvel wants a younger Spider-Man. Tom Holland looks to meet those requirements to be the one, given he's only 19 and can actually do things a Spider can't. Sony & Marvel will now co-produce the movies, put they can use the character in Marvel properties now. Whatever the next story in this franchise is, hopefully will be in well hands. I did love Amazing 2, and I say that with no regrets at all. I'll definitely miss Garfield's enthusiasm, charm, wise cracks, etc. He was a believable Spider-Man, but with the next one going in a different direction, it should be interesting how things are developed. 

Summer Movie Pandemonium, 2015

      I can relate to the Summer Box Office schedule. It's always busy, very jammed & it can be wearying. It's been a long time since I wrote something (Day & Night jobs have me in a jam, at the moment) and, so I figured, I'd be irresponsible, if I didn't discuss the summer films for 2015. Sure, I could've saved my money on something more, alas, this is my 'something more'. Originally, I'd plan on talking about each movie, separately, which is normally how I review movies, but with work obligations catching up with blogging, It was difficult to make both worlds meet in a proper fashion. So, here, I'll write an overview of the movies that I saw this summer to recap this segment of the year. A quick review of each film, sort of.

     By my count, I've watched 16 movies during the May-August section of the movie year, easily my highest mark as a movie buff during this time of year. 4 of those, I've watched at least 2 times or more (Avengers 2, M:I 5, Mad Max 4, & Ant-man). The only thing that I'm disappointed by, is that I didn't see more to increase that number. I didn't get to see Minions or Inside Out to build on that number (And, I work a lot of hours just to see these films late at night, sometimes). At the same time, when you work on building something you love doing, you have to push yourself to the highest of limits just to accomplish seemingly impossible odds. Hopefully, because of that, I can get back into the flow of this. The following list is done in no particular order, but if you must know my favorite movie of the summer? It was, indeed, Avengers 2. 

The Best

Avengers: Age of Ultron: My favorite moment about Avengers 2, was never getting sucked into the expectations made by the fans or media. Surely, I have many moments when I was Awed by what I was witnessing from Ultron, The Maximoff's, Vision or the team, itself; but when you hide expectations from yourself, expecting everything to come forth, is when I felt, Age of Ultron met just about every single expectation. Will these moments top the ones from the first? Depends on how you expect things to go. Sometimes, the best ways to go into movies, is to not have a bloated vision of what to expect, just let it play out. My only regret? I never got to see it in theaters in the same month for a 4th time. Not because I got tired of my experience with the spectacle, but I had car trouble, which prevented me from seeing it a 4th time.  

Mad Max: Fury Road: George Miller went through many hurdles towards getting this film made, suffering through Mel Gibson's issues, The US dollar collapsing with Australia's dollar, 9/11, reshoots, etc. Survived even Tom Hardy getting frustrated with Miller, at one point, with the 450 hours of footage shot. Basically, Fury Road is the movie equivalent to Jak X, except there are no power-ups or ottsels roaming the screen. There are little plot cues in the film, since everything, literally keeps moving. Tom Hardy does a great job at recapturing Gibson's version of Max Rockatansky from mannerisms & body language, while Charlize Theron is commanding as Furiosa. It helped having seen the first three to get a background as to what I was going to encounter. It was pure excellence, to say the least.

 Dope: One of the most important films of 2015.  

 Mission: Impossible-Rogue Nation: Tom Cruise might as well start going all Death Wish on these films, soon enough. Rebecca Ferguson is a worthy edition to this installment.

 Amy: Director Asif Kapadia outdid himself with this film after his documentary on Ayrton Senna. I don't think anyone can structure a documentary like he does. I knew Amy Winehouse was damaged, but, yeah; she went through it.

Ant-Man: Oh snap, Marvel can do heist films, too? Yup, loved it.

Straight Outta Compton: Could've been a prolific biopic. As a movie, though, it's a great time.

The Surprises

Jurassic World: Only thing better that would've been better than Bryce Dallas Howard's light blue heels, is if they came with a turbo thrusters option. 

The Man from U.N.C.L.E: Straight Outta Compton jacked this film from making more money than it should have. Wish it got more notoriety, but, ya know, bad break.

Trainwreck: Truly a Judd Apatow film, but one that doesn't go hard for being more than what it should be, which is a good thing. 

The D Train: A Jack Black/James Marsden flick that was truly forgotten. Came out the same month as Age of Ultron did. 

Vacation: Ed Helms accomplished his one goal: Don't be like Vegas Vacation. 

The Doldrums

Tomorrowland: The dullest $200 million dollar film of all-time. Even duller than Superman Returns

Fantastic Four (2015 reboot): Felt like my rating of this film kept dropping every day. That entire cast has my deepest sympathies. 

Mistress America: Didn't necessarily hate it, I just couldn't vibe with it. 

No Escape: If Owen Wilson is your lead in a action/drama movie and he's his comedic self in it? You're just trying too hard.

Ex Machina (Movie Review)

     

     It's really a shame that this film won't get the notoriety it deserves since Age of Ultron came out, but, then again, competition is competition, so someone is going to lose out when a film like that is getting most of the box office returns. Right away, I was sold on Ex Machina, because the movie didn't require any hand holding. You know the main players and then some, putting the audience in a place where they don't have to be inquired to do a lot of hard thinking from the get-go. It's not a pretentious movie and I say that for the fact that some of these movies feel condescending to a certain segment of filmgoers that don't watch these movies, so I was glad to come into it feeling welcomed to this world.

     Caleb, played by Domhnall Gleeson (he's the son of Brendan Gleeson, if you didn't know) is a computer programmer for Bluebook, a search engine in the vein of a Google or Bing. He's so good at his job, he ends up being chosen to meeting with his boss, Nathan, played by Oscar Issac to work on intricate experiments. Caleb was specifically chosen to see if one of these items could inhibit human emotions, particularly one machine named Ava. Alicia Vikander's character is tricky, because you initially think she's on the side of Caleb, when the two of them are conversing on love, death, birth, Nathan, etc. Vikander, other than Issac's Nathan, were so good, it's like, which of these characters is playing poor Caleb like a fool? Fascinating developments. Isaac continues his streak of compelling characters here, too. The thing I liked about his role, was he was not debilitated by emotions. While he sees his projects as nothing but useless machines, they display characteristics just like human when they're afraid of their creator. He watches them break down, taunt them or fraternize we them. Otherwise he doesn't much care for these things, despite describing to his guest how cool they are. He's driven by success not emotions. 

     Director Alex Garland is no stranger to certain forms of nihilism (see: 2012's Dredd). He creates this claustrophobic space where things are more than what they seem & in only his second directed motion picture, he allows Gleeson, Issac & Vikander to display their opposite emotions. 

    If this movie came out weeks before Age of Ultron or any other major release in the summer, it might've done solid business. Unfortunately, it didn't happen that. That being said, see it immediately.

      5 out of 5

     

Cinematic Strain, Episode 12: Right Answers, Wrong Questions

15 minutes on the events in Baltimore. Lots of pausing, but I didn't need to edit the audio in order to consider the authenticity of the clip:

Best in Movies 2014: 3. Guardians of the Galaxy

Directed by: James Gunn

Produced by: Kevin Feige

Written by: James Gunn & Nicole Perlman
Cinematography By: Ben Davis

Composed by: Tyler Bates

     Lately, there's a trend with comic book movies, where if it doesn't include character X or item Y, que that "It's not like the comics" talking point. Man of Steel was hit with that notion for being unlike the predecessors that came before it and for its darker portrayal; let alone, it was the first Superman film didn't have this feeling of cuddliness to it. Nonetheless, if you're a well-known property that's had at least 3 films or movies, good chance it'll be scrutinized by numerous sites designed to suck out joy. Guardians of the Galaxy was considered to be Marvel Studios's big test to prove if it could make a film series without Avengers or Iron Man as a title series. If it flopped, narratives would run the gamut Of course, the irony in that is, those characters were considered afterthought, once upon a time, until they received their respective earnings for Disney. As for Guardians? $774 Million dollars worldwide later suggest that the impending "Comic Book Bubble of Doom" is still a myth. In a summer where heavyweights underwhelmed by certain standards, something unfamiliar to audience made the most money, where notable franchises couldn't maintain the appeal of GOTG. I guess my surprise was that Days of Future Past or Amazing Spider-Man 2 didn't gross as much, domestically, in comparison to Guardians, so seeing a brand-new property do well instantly is a good thing. Phase 2 was already better than Phase 1, but seeing the Marvel Cinematic Universe expand to newer worlds outside of ours has finally established their intentions.

 Unorthodox Chemistry

     

     With all these characters co-existing for a greater good, they sure do have a challenging journey trying to find themselves for the greater good. One wants to exact vengeance against a man who murdered his family, another is the daughter of a man who wants to obtain all of the Infinity Stones, the other three range from a genetically-engineered raccoon, a tree whose vocabulary is limited to four words & a man who leads them all has a deeper secret other than being human. Guardians does a lot of things well, but the chemistry & banter between the five characters significantly works in tandem with its story. All of them have a bevy of insecurites to become worthy heroes  towards their own forms of redemption. We don't get a true origin story here; we do, however, get individual tales interwoven throughout the movie as a sped-up backstory. Their stories are easy to follow and don't require any handholding; you know once they meet, they all eventually have the same goal by the end of the film. All of the leads here are exceptional, led by Chris Pratt. You could tell he was born to play a role like this from the moment he puts on that Sony Walkman, moving to "come & get your love." And that just the beginning of the film. All of the leads are exceptional, but I wasn't prepared towards the roles played by Vin Diesel & Bradley Cooper. Diesel utters 4 words for the whole film as an anamorphic tree named Groot & Cooper is just insane as Rocket Raccoon. His story is pretty grim for something that's assumed to be cute & cuddly by some. If this were to be another film with by the numbers characters, the character development wouldn't be as compelling as it is with this dysfunctional group. James Gunn nailed that aspect very well. Also, the film is well-written, giving the characters lots of personality beyond their assumed archetypes.  

Why Nerd Hate Couldn't Hurt this film?

      With little knowledge from comic and that it wasn't film series, Guardians of the Galaxy wasn't picked on as much, compared to, for example, The Dark Knight Rises., and since it was a new venture for Disney, it was easy to like by all, even critics. Newer versions of characters/films tend to get hated more because some are sequels, reboots, etc. Unless if your films are the X-Men films or the older Superman films, particularly films 1 &2, starring Christopher Reeve, there's a good chance they'll be teflon from haters. It doesn't matter the inconsistencies with each argument, these people will argue breathless about why Ronan the Accuser sucks as an adversary or why this film didn't have an origin story. The ladder is valid, but in order to understand a movie requires one to be invested in the experience without being spoiled by articles, TV spots & rumors. As I said earlier, people were saying that this was supposed to be a big test for Marvel Studios and if it underperforms in theaters, it could hurt Marvel Studios. But it didn't. Another narrative dies a slow death & we all can enjoy the festivities in piece. If there's suppose to be an impending bubble of these things failing, there has to be something leading up to the demise of these films, shows, cartoons, etc. An overall representation, not a 2-3 sample size that confirms the bias of some who are addicted to the failures of these films. Guardians proved once more that you can't underestimate the vision of Marvel. But, in all honesty, none of these properties are nothing to underlook.  

WE ARE GROOT FOREVER!

      For now, this is what space operas are measured by. Fun characters, lots of colorful worlds, countless threats, bright skies, and infinite possibilities . If JJ Abrams Star Trek and the inevitable Star Wars Ep. 7 have a vision to compete against, it's this movie. I'm sure the next installment of those films will be wonderful by all measures, but they probably know that GOTG changed the way a movie like this. Other that a few exceptions in 2014, have I felt emotions for a Raccoon & a tree. I cried watching one film about space and time, yet I wasn't meant to have emotions for things that emote such small ones. Whatever Gunn has planned for Phase 3 of the MCU, things will continue towards a place that's is unbounded by imagination.

Cinematic Strain, Episode 11: Furious Collins!

-Furious 7 & Danny Collins are reviewed.

-Fandango is cool.

-Suicide Squad pic

-Batman v. Superman is leaked, then officialized!

Best in Movies 2014: 4. Gone Girl

Directed By: David Fincher

Written By: Gillian Flynn (screenplay & novel)

Distributed by: 20th Century Fox

     Admittedly, I don't like to talk a lot about social issues on the internet, since, I feel like the forum is noisy. Annoying think-pieces over-analyzing a movie, saying it doesn't live up to the topic of feminism or by focusing on the male counterpart, Nick Dunne, in Gone Girl. Just reading the debates about Amy Dunne's portrayal in the film from site after site, was a tiresome slog with thinkpieces trying to control the discussion of this movie beyond the film. Which is why, I do my best to avoid articles such as those, knowing they can detach the viewer before viewing it. Rather than give a compared portrayal of movie adaptation vs. book adaptation, I don't feel it would be necessary to do a compare/contrast on the depiction of Amy Dunne based on the condition of her feminism stance; it doesn't interest me. Doing that, would turn this into a nitpick contest of events outside the film, rather than appreciating the brilliance that David Fincher crafted here. My thoughts on Amy are this: She's needy & vindictive. The moment Nick pushed her, was when she planned to coax Nick into falsifying a murder so that he'll have no choice but to respect her. And it worked. If this was just another suspense film with a no-frills twist, it would've ruined the experience. Luckily, Gone Girl has more than just the "girl next door" vibe going around. 

Guilty as Charged: I rooted for Crazy Amy

     

 
     Never in my life, have I rooted for such a miserable, irredeemable person, such as Amy. I sort of low-key rooted for Anton Chigurh in No Country for Old Men, yet, he was a straight character with no catch to him. Amy pulled so many hatches here, her elaborate scheming won me over as a guy who generally roots for protagonist. (Well, we all usually root for the title character; alas, though, I was won over by a psychopath.) Her performance was so compelling, gripping even, that it left me with no choice but to settle for the main heel to walk out on top, and the reason for that was the way she sold indoctrinated herself. I don't want to compare her to real life court cases, though, she does have share similar characteristics that enables her to be more of a victim than as a cold-blooded individual. We truly don't get to know Rosamund Pike's character real motive until she sheaths herself from being innocent Amazing Amy to the antonym of "Amazing." Whatever that opposite is, it's certainly not a positive definition. What makes this movie great, is that our version of the truth doesn't matter, because our questions, be it from this film or any high-profile case with generic blonde X, are usually derivatives of why she deserves sympathy or not. When I read those columns, not enough credit was given to Amy for her ingenuity for elaborating a plot, literally; and, how she was able to weasel out of the ordeal. If only Pike nabbed the Oscar for best actress in reality, it would've been the ultimate getaway.  

Was the Ending Justified?

      For me, it was. I don't about how a lot of other people felt about the ending, nevertheless, some feel differently about it. The entire film was so good, I didn;'t want to compartmentalizing it up and down to justify why this piece doesn't fit with the others. Does it simply end without a clear explanation? That depends on how the world made sense of the hours before we saw bloody Amy Dunne comes fainting into the arms of Nick Dunne to play Damsel in Distress. What I saw, was a man coming to grips that the world wasn't going to reason with his side of the story. Despite well-managed PR, A great lawyer & a supportive sister (regardless, if you have a young side chick on the side), all of it faded since the public tends to tune-out on these cases. Only the facade of good will was going to get Nick back in the graces of the public. If he attempted anything sideways to complicate the coverage of his wife, he would be a more despised person than before. For the best, he hid behind the truth of what was really happening. Since she has the leverage on the narrative, he caved. To think of the ending as disappointing or lacking, sort of misses the point. We got finality, except, a woman sick of things changed so much that all her husband could do was submit. Not the greatest ending, but I think it has a deeper meaning after the credits rolled.    

       Fade to Black  

     Aside from the big twist in the middle, Rosamund Pike & Ben Affleck's excellent performances, David Fincher's sharp direction, there's lot of greatness here. In order to enjoy Gone Girl, stay away from any opinions from anyone. Basically, that's how I went into the movie, without any previous knowledge of it. It was a David Fincher movie & knowing the man's movies, he always something clever to sell to the audience; he's a great storyteller, in that regard. Push aside all of the previous Medea movies that you watched from before experiencing a great performance from Tyler Perry (like, really). All of the female actresses are engaging, besides Pike. Kim Dickens's Det. Rhonda Boney, in particular, was an appealing performance, too, as the persistent police officer attempting to solve the Dunne mystery. I'm still in awe from the events of this film and no time soon will I stop being in shock from what transpired. Whatever Fincher plans next, I'll definitely be there for the fun.

The Cinematic Strain, Episode 10: Agent of Blending

Figured I'd try to reciprocate the show on my blogging site to add some variety. Hope you enjoy this episode of The Cinematic Strain:

Best in Movies 2014: 5. The Raid 2

Directed by: Gareth Evans

Written by: Gareth Evans

Cinematography by: Matt Flannery

& Dimas Imam Subhono

Choreography by:

Music by: Fagar Yuskemal Aria Prayogi & Joseph Trapanese

Distributed by: Sony Pictures Classics & Stage 6 Films

     American films will have a hard time replicating the sheer brilliance of The Raid 2, if they even consider remaking it for a domestic audience. To any filmmaker in the US attempting to do the same thing, good luck nailing the choreography, simple storytelling & direction. Consider me a late-bloomer to the brand with the fact that I only saw the original three years after I saw the sequel sometime during the summer of 2014. What impressed me about the original, was that it didn't allow itself to be defined by its basic story, allowing its amazing choreography to take center stage.  A SWAT team heads to this apartment complex with a shitload of drug dealers and crime lords just waiting for them in order to ambush them into defeat. Raid 2 is slightly more complex due to its 2 1/2 length and expanded variety with narrative and settings. Rather than approach the concept with a similar setup, the movie then adds a wrinkle to the story by making the protagonist, Rama (Iko Uwais), an undercover agent to look into a crime syndicate that can't rival the events of the first. It is a trite concept, but this is a movie that stand on its own without the need of a deep story.

Choreography/Fights 

    

       Smooth, focused choreography is a major contribution for why The Raid 2 works so well without the usual American bells & whistles. Regular moviegoers, like myself, rarely payed attention to intricacies of cinema. Not only did I feel like it was too much work to pay attention to the "making of" fights, but it requires too much over-thinking to parse over every kick, punch, block or push. American critics tend to do sort of nit-picking just a bit too much, in my opinion. Other than its characters, this is a paramount thing to this franchise. It's a rare thing in cinema for something, other than narrative, to move a scene along, since the easiest thing to do to compensate that, is more plot. Lucky for us, we don't need a varied story or a love story to move things along. Speaking of varied, the range of fights spread out from the apartment setting from the original, giving this film a load of depth. They fight in prisons, warehouses, streets, car chases, etc. There are a total of 19 fight scenes throughout the film, adding that balance of story and action. It also adds more intrigue because you aren't dealing with just interior settings only meant to move the story along. The actors use a style called silat, a technique that comes from the geo-cultural area of Southeast Asia, mostly from the Indonesian Archipelago of the land. Compared to other martial art stances, it's a discipline that does a lot of adaptability on certain conditions. As illustrated in the film, these people are very skilled. And, as many of these fights demonstrate, the generic fighter can keep up with Rama; doesn't matter how, they just can.  A favorite scene of mine, takes place near the end of the movie with Rama & The Assassin (Cecep Rahman) fighting in a kitchen. Before the scene breaks into a frenzy, the two combatants size up one another with their stances. Basically, both guys play a game of who can psyche out who first before the hardcore madness begins. For what it's worth, that scene felt like it would've been the end of Rama. The Assassin was a worthy adversary to Rama, since, they're style are similar in grace & balance. Despite the best efforts of Hammer Girl & Baseball Bat Man, they're advantages were that, they were skilled in weaponry & insanity. Sure, they shook Rama, to a degree, yet, once he was able to exploit their flaws, fate determined they're ironic outcomes. The penultimate fight had a different anticipation. Other than the sheer brutality of the outcome, it seemed that Rama & Assassin respected one another's skill set. It didn't matter who won or lost, all that mattered was survival. I believe that was the overall allegory between the two: Who's survival instinct was bigger, not who was the better fighter. Other fights were like all the others, but that one, was for a worthy purpose. 

Story/Characters

     As I pointed out before, the story is the least important component to this movie, but I think writing it off due to its basic structure is condescending to the action genre, as a whole. What I enjoyed about the narrative here, is how it doesn't allow itself to be a thought provoking action film. Hanna was that film, a good movie, but one that didn't have to be the one that attempts to be unlike the others. The Raid 2 is, at best, an action movie with crime drama elements. One man has to infiltrate a crime family just to fit in long enough, so that the authorities nab the perpetrators, Another wants to take over. These elements are familar, yes; but, it adds to the variability. Evans could've done Raid 1.5 and I still would've enjoyed it, though, I wouldn't have been praising it as much as I am now. Characters have stakes to their situation. Rama's purpose is extended from just keeping his family safe, but his survival and the success of his clandestine mission meeting its proper end. Other characters have bigger roles compared to the "point A, point B" direction of the first film. Not only was I engrossed with the motivations of Uco, Bangun, Rama and Bunawar, but their situations met a decisive purpose that had significant meaning. Sure, it's not the greatest story, but the added dimension within the story, gives the movie a different personality from its predecessor.

Closing

    This is the Extreme Championship Wrestling of movies, as far as I'm concerned. No American action movie can touch its style, choreography, or subtlety. 2014 displayed a lot of strength within that genre with John Wick, The Equalizer & Captain America 2. As much as I enjoyed those films, they just aren't comparable. And doing that, I feel, would be unwise of me. I'm interested in seeing what'll happen with Raid 3 in the near future. If its anywhere like this, just bigger? We can only imagine how far the makers can take this series from here.

Overrated Film of 2014: X-Men Days of Future Past

     You know you were annoyed with a film when it was helmed as "the summer movie we've been waiting for," as quoted from a TV spot by a film critic. Boyhood is more worthy of this accolade than X-Men: Days of Future Past, in my opinion, though, I can understand why it was heralded for its technical aspects for as much as I thought it was Ok. I must note that, I did, in fact, enjoy the latest installment of X-Men, that's not my true vision for writing this. It's the full-blown overhyping of a tried-and-true formula dating back to 2000.

     When First Class was under the direction of Matthew Vaughn in 2011, a lot of the wrongs made by Bryan Singer & Brett Ratner (The Last Stand) felt corrected. The flawed framework was still intact, though, there seemed to be effort towards righting lots of wrongs. It still had flaws with some character development, and some narratives weren't well-defined (What the hell is Mystique doing in 1963?), but it was a fine film that this franchise should've been. My main problem with Days of Future Past, is that it’s hailed as the summer's best, when it’s just a decent film. Once Singer retook the franchise, it was f'n status quo as usual.

      It's weird that some were enthralled by Quicksilver's sequence in the kitchen. Was it a good scene? Well, using the cloaking device that is comedy, it works fine. Alas, it's a visual splendor that was "WOW" in 2003, not 2014.  A sequence that's been done in the Matrix trilogy & Max Payne countless times is further proof that we are indeed in a dimension that's currently out of the control of rational beings. Somehow, people were blown away by a scene that didn't require much other than speed from the beginning of the 21st century. Also, I got the feel, at times, that nothing significant happened. Sentinels killed a lot of mutants, granted and, yes, the timeline was reset after every Shadowcat time-warp, but I still had this empty feeling that of nothing. A lot of the film gave me that "eh" feel, just moments that never felt important enough for every scene. John Ottman's return as the composer was appreciated, albeit, would've been better if Henry Jackman could build upon his cues First Class? Because he really did a good job with that composition.

       

       Honestly, I don't get why critics gave it such overblown praise other than to spite other comic book movies all because they didn't change its formula because of the cast. X-Men's cinematic survival is based on a nostalgia that spans even beyond the original film. The 1992 cartoon, clearly, is still in the hearts and minds of many who do enjoy these movies, regardless of their shortcomings. And, for as much as people, like myself, who aren't hip to these films; I guess, good for those who enjoy them. Unfortunately, that also means, we'll never get that dream X-men film that we all hoped for. Oh well, let’s hope X-Men Apocalypse can gives us the movie were hoping for. And (sigh) I will see it, for what it’s worth, at this point.

Worst Movie of 2014: A Million Ways to Die in the West

   

     Westerns in the 21st century shouldn't be made if they're going to be this homogenized. A lack of racist and slavery jokes. Over explaining jokes.  Now, this is not say that, I'm inquiring this film to reach the potential of Mel Brooks's Blazing Saddles, but it fails at all of the general principles of how to do a proper western comedy well, let alone any live-action comedy. It's snarky, uninspired & unfunny. It's should obvious to anyone that Seth McFarlane wasn't made for this role. Being a highly accomplished voice actor isn't simple, same for physical acting. You notice, from the get-go, McFarlane isn't right for this role because he's so tight for the whole movie. Same goes for when he attempts to, needlessly, explain a joke to the audience like weren't not supposed to understand the comedy he's trying to establish here. Some jokes that you'd expect might be a hit (For example, a meaningless cameo from Back to the Future's Doc Brown) fall flat because there's no confidence in the material being provided. Sadly, for what it's worth, makes sense that this has to be told through a simpleton over and over again. Other than Charlize Theron and Jamie Foxx, there was hardly a redeeming soul to save this travesty. Not even Neil Patrick Harris or Sarah Sliverman could save this from movie dysentery.

     In closing, I was considering a runner-up for this category. I didn't even bother looking for a contender as an honorable mention in futility in 2014. Blame it on me for seeing too many good films to care about seeing any other bad ones.

Best in Movies 2014: 10-6

10) Birdman

     
      Edward Norton needed this film. Yes, Michael Keaton kills it as a once prominent actor who settles into the world of Broadway, but consider Norton to be back among the frame of versatile actors to lose what he had and regain it. Norton was, simply, magnificent as rival of sorts to Keaton's Riggan Thomson. It was like, whose ego could beat-up whose more, as far as dominance goes. Norton was classic Norton in this movie. Birdman sort of plays to that trope rather brilliantly, as Keaton’s Riggan leaves the cluttered world of Hollywood for something more subtle, like plays. Of course, when you leave a character that many identify with, you're never able to leave that identity that people force you to be in. Anytime, Riggan's tried to leave his successful past, he'd be haunted by it, repeatedly. If I had to define Birdman's plot: A lot of people dealing with tons of insecurities. 

       Props, once again, to the supporting cast, particularly, Emma Stone and her plethora of facial muscle; and, the superb direction by Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu for relying one whole shot for the entire film. It’s a gimmicky concept to use, but since a portion of the film takes place in a theater, it makes sense, literally and metaphorically. If this was a movie built on the one-shot construct, yet had little depth, this might just be a decent film. Luckily, it's more than that.

   

9) Top Five

     
       I'm a little upset at myself for not having an official review of Top Five; too many work obligations and late nights, so I was never able to provide a proper review for this film, so, technically, this is my review. Without question, this is easily Chris Rock's best film, ever. Not even joking. Rock could've done Hammy the Bear and I would've been cool with it. Alas, despite his incredible stand-up routines, he's always struggled to translate that success into memorable roles at the Box Office. A simple reason as to why this film work, was because it allowed Rock to be vulnerable. Before, he'd be some caricature attempting comedy. It wasn't that he didn't try, he did. It just wasn't funny. Besides Pootie Tang, a rather ridiculous film, he doesn't do a lot of good comedies. 

      Top Five works for not relying on tired gimmicks. What makes this work, is that it doesn't have to try hard to be a competent comedy. It allows the dialogue and story to do its work without telling us what's going on. The audience can figure out what's funny and/or what isn't funny. Also, all of the cameos work and even some of them have importance to the story. Rosario Dawson works as the double agent film critic, who follows Andre Allen (Rock) for most of the film. JB Smoove is dope as Allen's assistant. Before this film came out during December, 22 Jump Street & Neighbors (which I thought was OK, at best) held reign as the best comedy of 2014.  22 Jump Street was cool for making fun of sequels and how hard it is to top a predecessor. While Neighbors held weight, for some, was it being a frat-boy comedy. Top Five is just a much a deeper movie than those two. Add that it has more replay value in the long run, it’s hard not to get tired of it. 

      Now, as for my Top Five? Mine’s more unorthodox than others, so I went in a different direction from most who have their favorite rappers, rockers, jazz, etc. I went towards film composers, because I grew up loving film scores at an early age. This is my list, including an honorable mention:                                     

Top 5 film composers: 1) Hans Zimmer 2) Jerry Goldsmith 3) John Williams 4) Ennio Morricone 5) Eliott Goldenthal HM: Shirley Walker
— Cinematic Wanderer (@HALLS24) December 28, 2014

8) Captain America 2

      Just as shocking as my ranking of The Winter Soldier, I almost didn't see it in theaters back in May right before Amazing Spider-Man 2 was premiering nationwide. Initially, I was going to see it in April, albeit, work nights and personal matters kept me from seeing it earlier than I should have. Taking over from director Joe Johnson, The Russo Brothers did a lot to intertwine spy thriller & action-adventure, relate it to current times (i.e. War on Terror, Surveillance, etc) & come away with a fantastic film that has a different feel from other comic book films. It's also a well-balanced film, which allows for a lot of action, plot, character development and shocking twists bound to follow. This could've been another run-of-the-mill action event that would've been improved and tweaked from The First Avenger, yet, it still would've been good, just not an 8th place film for 2014. Besides, who've thought Robert Redford would be in a movie such as this playing a very important villain whose compromises S.H.I.E.L.D as a sleeper cell for Hydra. That man has helmed some of the most important movies for all-time (The President's Men, The Natural, and so on). Chris Evans, gradually, improved as Steve Rogers here. Learning from Joss Whedon and his role from the first film sort of is an evolution for a man who was once Johnny Storm. Scarlett Johansson grew here, too. I'm not saying she became a better actress because of the Marvel property or this movie, let's get that straight. We, as an audience, got the opportunity to see her character's growth as a crucial conduit to the Captain America/Avengers series narrative. She wasn't good in Iron Man 2 (more a fault of the film than her, to be fair), but was better served in the first Avengers film, using her interrogative skills to her benefit, when baiting Loki to confess on any possible intelligence. Unrelated to this list, I don't want to see a Black Widow film. We'll just have to rely on her backstory via dialogue. Take it or leave. A lot of people were so well-developed here, you hardly cared, because the movie flowed. Anthony Mackie (Falcon), Sebastian Shaw (Winter Soldier), Samuel Jackson (Nick Fury) were all magnificent. As the series turns to 2016’s Civil War, after Age of Ultron & Ant-Man, we can only ponder where things go from here.

7) Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

     I really struggled to rank this one properly when I planned out this list of films for 2014. Mind y'all, this Dawn was an amazingly, epic movie. But, when the rest of the top-5 spoils you to submission, it's hard to find a place for this and Captain America 2. Unfortunately, I didn't see this in theaters when I had the opportunity too. I just didn't have the context of Rise of the Planet of the Apes during the month of June. So, when I planned out Christmas day, I decided to do a double feature of both films, before I ran out of time for it. What makes this sequel superior to its predecessor, it revels in being a story about the Apes than the humans. Also, it's a better movie, if you focus on the marketed beings here. Developing the Ape characters, as a whole, makes this franchise a better film than the originals were, when they relied on more practicalities. A big reason why past films probably weren't good, WAS, well, too much focus on one human character interacting with humans dressed as apes. It took the mystique away from allowing the idea of "man vs ape" away, since, you saw the imperfections. Andy Serkis, Toby Kebbell, Judy Greer and others used motion capture to create the movement of the Apes. Whatever position you stand on the issue of practical effects or computer generated images, you have to applaud the work made here by capturing their movements, vocals and motivations. It add a different layer when it's aided by mocap. So amazing. The story's more multi-layered, compelling characters and an enriching score by Michael Giacchino. Too many other good things to name here, other than, we have to wait a couple more years until movie 3. Ugh. 


6) Selma

     Ava Duvernay is a bad-ass. A damn shame by the Academy Awards for not nominating her for best director or for bowing down to others because Selma wasn't true to Lyndon B. Johnson. She didn't set out to make a movie that'll appeal to masses who wanted another homogenized slave or Civil Rights film that'll sort of skirt away the real problems, she did a movie set out to tell as true a story of the movement.  This is a much needed film for our times, because of the issues going on, right now. Shootings of unarmed black people & the diligent work by protesters bringing to light the tragedies of Mike Brown, Tamir Rice, Ezell Ford, Renisha McBride and others that were shot wrongfully. Selma didn't bullshit its way towards doing another one of these films that'll get a nomination by just being visionary. It proceeded to illustrate black & white relations and how hard it is for us to come together as a society. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., for once, wasn't looked as a "holier than thou" figure here, too. Even the fight for Civil Rights was a hard thing to fight for in America. Hell, still is, to this day. Paramount, Harpo Films (Oprah's film company) & Pathe could've Lee Daniels-ed this project and you'd have another one of these overwrought movies that don't serve black people well and over stylizes black people. David Oyelowo's portrayal of MLK is simply incredible. He doesn't just nail his voice but his intellect, posture & vulnerability. He nailed all of that. Props to Tom Wilkerson for his portrayal of LBJ as he too portrayed him as a flawed figure and, no, Selma was not his idea as some would wrongfully proclaim. The cast is properly well-served here, too; from George Wallace all the way to James Bevel. The sad part about this film, was, it was going to be picked apart by some, because, Ava didn't set out to make another wispy-ass film on civil rights and/or racism. She wanted to make THE story of the movement without being vilified by some who can't handle historical accuracy. She didn't set out to make "Kumbaya My Lord" the movie just to make some feel better, which would simply resolve nothing when it comes to ending racism, intolerance, ignorance, etc. She presented the movie from a practical, reasonable perspective, which is what we all want when discussing this issue. Also, it looks astonishing, thanks to cinematographer Bradford Young. It has a very 1960’s style to portray it for the era it’s in. I didn't want to see it, at first, because 2014 was so goddamn exhausting. I turned down "Dear White People" for that very reason & I might have done the same with this one. Glad I saw it. Take anyone you know to see it, it's that important. Shit, if you’re a Democrat or Republican, see this film. There’s no “side” here, just a rational portrayal of everyone and everything.

Best in Movies 2014: 15-11

15.) Nightcrawler

     Very odd for me to refer to Nightcrawler as the little movie that could, but, in a sense, it is. Made for nearly $9 million dollars, Jake Gyllenhaal put everything into this project in hopes for an Oscar nomination. He was also the first actor to be a part of this film, adding more to the project. Dan Gilroy, who wrote screenplays for Freejack, Two for the Money and Real Steel, stepped into the directing chair as if he did it before. Brother of Tony (Michael Clayton, The Bourne Legacy) & John Gilroy, who is a film editor. Dan was able to bring Jake to a place of nihilism, which is weird, since, he's a first time director, so, watching Gyllenhaal's Lou Bloom exude arrogance or Rene Russo's Nina becoming consumed to Lou's perverted vision for broadcast news, it was something that took me by surprise. Gyllenhaal brought his A game for this movie and the character, Lou Bloom. It's odd that I think that he being in this film is more challenging than some of the other work that I'm accustom to seeing him in. You had other actors like Bill Paxton and Riz Ahmed play the role of spoiler here, and they were both great in their own respects, but I was here for Russo & Gyllenhaal's characters. Both of them were battling different issues. One was trying to stay relevant in network news, while the other was selling desensitized news via video. Worst part for Nina, she has to choose what Lou is selling, because she'll be irrelevant, otherwise. Kinda reminds me of the current state of reporting, really. There's a lot of references of "soul selling" here. I mentioned in my review that I thought this movie should've been a tad short, but I apologize; 2 hours was good enough for this movie.

14.) The Fault in Our Stars

     This just made my list by the slimmest of margins, not that a list should come down to a wild.  I manage to catch Fault in time when prepping it for this list, when I had time to work on this. What impressed me the most, is how the cast treated a disease, such as cancer, as that it wouldn't hinder the lives of Hazel & Augustus. As their characters developed, and as cliched as this sounds, I ended up rooting for them to overcome their illness. Other than Interstellar, this was the closest I was to crying. No Joke. Even though it can make the viewer emotional or dispirited because it hits you hard metaphorically, it does have a way of making you feel fine when the movie attempts comedy to shed away the drama. While, I can't make a relation from the book to film adaptation, because, alas, I haven't read it. If there was a movie that you had to watch that screams YOLO for young and old. Truly, it is the little movie that could, when you beat out the $178 million Edge of Tomorrow and had high female & millennials show up for something like this. Only thing I can say is, good for y’all & this film.

13.) Get On Up

     Had a slight dilemma with this one. First things first, I loved this film and Chadwick Boseman's portrayal as James Brown.  Plotwise, it's filmed out of order to give that "best of James Brown" feel. I didn't mind that it was in this way and it worked for this movie. Preferably, it would've been considerate to allow the story of Brown straightforward. That being said, some biopics do have this tendency of being dull in nature for being so damn linear. I remember watching The King's Speech years ago and I couldn't stay up for that (It was also nighttime & performed my evening job, thus, sleepy). Some struggle to set you in the right mood, others have that right approach to make things interesting. It's a damn shame this was released at the same time as Guardians of the Galaxy on Aug 1st. Sure, it barely made its budget ($30 produced/$32 domestically), but Universal put this one at a bad date, so as people were partying to the ebbs & flows of Galaxy, this one was left alone, period. Chadwick will be in good hands as he'll be among the growing ranks at Marvel Studios as Black Panther, though. Not a total loss for him or his superb acting prowess. 


12.) Edge of Tomorrow

     Before I get into my overview of Edge of Tomorrow, I'm still stunned that young adults managed to steal the shine away from Tom Cruise with The Faults in our Stars during the summer. Maybe folks were sick of effects-driven action flicks or maybe millennials decided for a weekend, it's Shaliene Woodley's time to take Cruise's throne. Then again, Cruise was a Box Office draw during the 90's, not today. It's kind of unfortunate this film didn't get more viewership in theaters. Can’t figure as to why that was, but sucks that it didn’t work out. Having caught it, recently, a lot of people missed out on a joyous spectacle. Besides Cruise, Emily Blunt was wonderful as the action heroine to rival that of her venerable star. Whether she was slicing creatures or teaching Lt. Bill Cage to master the art of death, she served a core purpose towards defeating the Mimics. There were times where it felt, she held everything together and Tom was the supporting character for the movie. Hopefully, I'll see her in more action movies, she really held her own here. Cruise was his usual cocky self here as a PR rep for the Army. Fitting role, really; because, he's never looked vulnerable, character-wise. He wasn't a sympathetic character at first, until, he was able to nail down the "rinse, repeat, death" thing to an art. As he kept losing, his skills, suddenly, improved with every death. I like to think of that as leveling up on the first stage of Devil May Cry (2005 version). Obviously, the selling point, is the "unlimited continues" concept here. The more you die, the easier the opportunities at success. But, just avoid getting a pint of someone's blood, you won't be able to reset the day. I never had the privilege of reading "All You Need is Kill" from Hiroshi Sakurazaka, which was adapted for Tomorrow, I'll have to check it out of curiosity. Still, though, to get beaten by Faults on the weekend of June 6-8, stands as a stunner for 2014. 

11.) Theory of Everything 

      About 40-45 minutes into Theory of Everything, when Stephen Hawking tried to get on those steps and saw his child upstairs, is when I realized, not only will Eddie Redmayne be nominated for best actor when the Oscars come around, but embodies Stephen Hawking in every single way. It was as if, I was seeing the man himself rather than the actor who portrayed the man. More than a love story than a science tale on time & psychics (However, they do play a role in the film) Everything exceeds by allowing us to appreciate the story of Stephen & Jane Hawking’s. Also, some of the subtlety works so well. Jokes, implied sex, etc. It all works here without trying to be another trite biographical film. It's a love story with a lot of added variables in order to tell this story. A lot of credit go to Felicity Jones, as well, for her role. What she can't match in physical acting, she's able to match in acting, since they worked so well together. Rest of the cast is fine, though, save for a few characters, who don’t matter towards the core relationship. They play the role of audience like the rest of us watching the movie. The direction is sharp, focused & solid, throughout.  Director James Marsh should be proud of the work that he achieved here.