IRON MAN 3

Summer movie season 2013 has officially begun with the beginning of Marvel's Phase Two with IRON MAN 3!

To kick off this “new chapter” of the Marvel cinematic universe's most popular character we welcome director Shane Black (KISS,KISS BANG,BANG). Black and Robert Downey Jr. are reunited and it's awesome. With screenwriter credits that include action classics such as LETHAL WEAPON and THE LAST BOY SCOUT, Shane Black is the exact guy you'd want on the Marvel team of film making talent. His contribution feels like whenever a comic book publisher would hire a new talented creative team for your favorite super hero.

I'm babbling on about Shane Black; to sum it up, he made a Lethal Weapon comic book movie.  That my friends is super cool! Not only that but ever since it's been known that Robert Downey Jr. may hang up the suit of armor sooner than later, I've made the comment that Iron Man is sort of like the 'James Bond' of this cinematic universe. Who will play the character next? Just like the Bond films. During the sweet looking end credits they had this 'Iron Man is a secret agent film from the 70's type vibe. I sat there and thought the movie did have a oo7 adventure vibe to it. Just another cool thought!

Tony Stark has never been the same since The Avengers saved New York City from nuclear fallout and planet Earth from alien domination.  He can't sleep and he also suffers panic attacks.  Stark is a natural born tinkerer.  Since he cannot sleep he builds Iron Man suits.  He's built a lot of them. Forty-two I think?  Innovation is also something Tony Stark is good at.  Besides crafting armor he has been trying to integrate some new technology called Extremis. Something he's been toying with every since being introduced to it by the lovely Maya Hanson back in 1999 at a Sweden science convention. This new tech has given Tony the ability to have a mental connection to his armor.

Another person Tony met at the convention was Aldrich Killian who later partnered up with Miss Maya Hanson and later perfected the Extremis virus. Fast forward to today where Aldrich makes a visit to Stark Industries selling the idea of the new and improved Extremis technology to Pepper Potts as the future in Weapons & Defense. Stark Industries is not interested in something that can easily get into the wrong hands.

Super heroes rarely have any time off. The latest threat to the world is a terrorist who calls himself The Mandarin. The Mandarin hates America and wants to destroy it with no mercy. One day the terror comes to the doorstep of Tony Stark when a terrorist attack almost takes the life of Happy Hogan, his close friend and former bodyguard.

After a personal threat from Tony. the Mandarin accepts the invitation by sending some rockets to his house via helicopter.

Presumed dead, Tony now has the low profile to find out what The Mandarin is really up to and stop him once and for all. With the armor at less the 5% power Tony must figure out how to stop the madman incognito using his wits and mechanical skills.

Will Iron Man stop The Mandarin before he kills the President of the United States of America? You'll have to see for yourself because I don't want to spoil the fun.

The way the film handles The Mandarin I'm a little unsure about. I remember an interview awhile back after the second film where director Jon Favreau said the third movie will deal with Iron Man's arch nemesis The Mandarin. Now in the comic books this character uses black arts and mystical powers. That seems odd to translate for the cinematic Iron Man. Mystical villains fit better in a Thor film one would think. But after introducing Thanos to the cinematic universe at the end of MARVEL'S THE AVENGERS all is possible in these films now.

The filmmakers of IRON MAN 3 decided not to make The Mandarin mystical which as made hard core comic geeks outraged. Not me. I liked what they did to the character just fine. Why did some people refer to him as The Master and not Mandarin? You'll have to see the movie to know what I'm talking about. Maybe we haven't seen the last of “The Mandarin” just yet?

IRON MAN 3 is the best one yet. It's also a nice complete trilogy of films. We probably don't need another one. Who am I kidding. This one is already making a killing in worldwide box office numbers!

For the next one I think they've set things up nicely for an 'Armor Wars' story arc.

IRON MAN 2

Does IRON MAN 2 suck?  The film does have some issues but to say it sucks I think is a tad harsh.  Under close observation one can tell the film was rushed to avoid the writers strike. On second thought it might have been in production during the writers strike? Who knows? All I know is, is that I like it. What keeps me coming back to IRON MAN 2 is the films fun irreverence. Robert Downey Jr. is Tony Stark and it'll be big shoes to fill after the Avengers sequel. Early word is that IRON MAN 3 fixes all the problems with IRON MAN 2. I'm expecting the new film to be far superior, so more than likely IRON MAN 2 might become a distant memory like STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK and not the worst thing ever like STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER.

I have a love hate relationship with the Avengers Initiative sub plot in the Phase One Marvel movies. I love the sub plot because I was a huge comic book geek back in the day and seeing this stuff unfold on the silver screen and done correctly mind you is a dream come true. What I hate is that the so called sub plot feels more like 'the plot' and these Phase One films tend to feel too much like advertisements for MARVEL'S THE AVENGERS. What if MARVEL'S THE AVENGERS had ended up sucking?

My only other problem with the movie is Micky Rourke. Great actor but in this he looks asleep half of the time. I don't think he wanted to be in the movie. I have no clue but in some scenes it really feels like he is just improvising most of the time probably because he doesn't give a crap.

My final nit pick is that the movie only has 3 or 4 action scenes in it. Isn't it movie law that a sequel must have at least twice the amount of action as the original?

Despite all that I love the humor in the movie. From the beginning at Capitol Hill till the end with Pepper Potts getting on to Tony for not telling her that he might be dying. Good Stuff.

In conclusion I think IRON MAN 2 holds up significantly well if you're a fan of the Tony Stark character and the rest of the Iron Man universe. But if you take that aspect away from it then yeah it's not that great of a movie with it's rushed production and pacing issues.

So far I love the Marvel cinematic universe and that's what's going to keep me coming back to this film. Maybe not as much as the other films in the series, but I'll likely never write it off as an epic fail.

Tomorrow I see IRON MAN 3 which kicks off Phase Two of the Marvel cinematic universe! I cannot wait!

PAIN AND GAIN

Micheal Bay finally made his Tony Scott film! Yes his entire career has had a major Tony Scott influence but with PAIN AND GAIN he nailed it 100%!

I love PAIN AND GAIN!

Now, for those of you that know me I like to give Micheal Bay a lot of crap. Overall I don't really care for his style but once in awhile it works for me like with THE ROCK, BAD BOYS II, THE ISLAND, and now PAIN AND GAIN. His over indulgent Baymageddon style works in these films whereas in PEARL HARBOR and TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN it makes your eyes and ears bleed.

A lot of crazy stuff happens here on planet earth. Sometimes people do the dumbest things. You hear about it all the time on the news, at the water cooler, or at a friends barbecue. You hear World's Most Dangerous Car Chases type stuff everyday. And once in awhile you'll hear a story that makes you think or say, “That's sounds like something straight out of a movie”! PAIN AND GAIN is one of those stories. And unfortunately when the end credits start to roll you'll be sickened to death that there are real twisted sons of bitches that would do something like this.

So yeah as I write this review I realize this true story has hit a nerve. I still very much like the movie because it's a story so insane that it needs to be told. And with a true crime story this crazy about excess, greed, and murder it makes perfect sense that Micheal Bay is the one to bring the tale to the silver screen.

A trio of bodybuilders in Florida get caught up in an extortion ring and a kidnapping scheme that goes terribly wrong. Mark Wahlberg plays Daniel Lugo a personal trainer who believes the key to living the American dream and entitlements are not hard work but rather get rich quick schemes. He's gotten in trouble before but once you've tasted greed it's hard to stop. He meets client Victor Kershaw who is your typical gym member that wants quick results without hard work, oh and by the way he is super rich. Daniel hates people like Victor, he's delusional in thinking these are the bad guys and one day decides to kidnap him and extort him for all he's worth.

Helping Daniel in this scheme is meathead Adrian Doorbal (Anthony Mackie) and born again ex-con Paul Doyle (Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson).

It takes some heavy convincing from Daniel at first but like he tells his future “business” partners, “I've seen this done a million times in the movies. Don't worry I know what I'm doing”.

To tell you what happens next would ruin the experience and you'll just have to see the movie yourself. I'll just say these dumb bastards make the Three Stooges look like professional criminals.

For me that's what makes me like this film so much, Micheal Bay isn't glorifying their actions but rather showing us how stupid these guys truly are.

This is probably Micheal Bay's best film. Great performances from everybody involved.

Highly recommended!

GANGSTER SQUAD

When it comes to movies like GANGSTER SQUAD it's really unfair for me to give them an honest review. I live for this stuff. Good guys vs. bad guys, tough as nails G-men taking out stone cold ruthless crime bosses. All taking place in a stylized, pulpy 1940's post-WWII Los Angeles.

Inspired by true events (not to be confused with based on a true story) GANGSTER SQUAD is the story of how a secret crew led by two police officers took down mob boss Micky Cohen and his ruthless control of Los Angeles. The leader of this squad Sgt. John O'Mara (played wonderfully by Josh Brolin) is the 'bull in the china shop' that's needed to bring down a guy like Micky Cohen.

He can't do it alone so in THE UNTOUCHABLES fashion he assembles a rag-tag under the radar, best of the best group of bad asses. The cool and smooth Sgt. Jerry Wooters (Ryan Gosling), heavy hitters like knife wielding Officer Coleman Harris (Anthony Mackie), and sharp shooter Officer Max Kennard (Robert Patrick). An organization like Micky's cannot be brought down by brawn alone so Officer Conway Keeler (Giovanni Ribisi) brings some brains and balance that is the final piece of the Gangster Squad.

The cast of GANGSTER SQUAD is amazing. Brolin and crew come off as genuine bad asses. The real star of the picture however is Sean Penn's Mickey Cohen. The performance is over the top and perfect for Ruben Fleischer's gangster genre film. Truth be told that the real life Mickey Cohen was indeed ruthless but kinda normal and dull. His real demise was tax evasion. I love that the filmmakers made the character more interesting and how Sean channeled a bit of James Cagney for the role. It's awesome!

When you watch GANGSTER SQUAD you're going to quickly notice that you've seen this before. But that's okay, remember this is a genre film not an A&E Biography. I didn't cry out 'fake' or 'phony' when I noticed call backs to classics such as THE UNTOUCHABLES and TOMBSTONE. It made the experience a much more enjoyable one not a cynical one. I mention TOMBSTONE because this movie felt much like a western just as much as it was a gangster film.

The film also reminded me of SIN CITY with it's sprinkle of dark humor and highly stylized violence. This fit the tone of GANGSTER SQUAD perfectly and for those saying this movie was just one step away from becoming spoof are smoking crack.

I believe the great amount of cynicism GANGSTER SQUAD is receiving stems from the tragic events that occurred at the midnight showing of THE DARK KNIGHT RISES last year in Aurora, Colorado. This resulted in the postponement of the movies release and scene removal of a shoot out taking place in a theater auditorium. Which was an appropriate move by the studio. I don't want to get political so I'll just leave it at that.

The bottom line is that GANGSTER SQUAD isn't going to reinvent the wheel of gangster movies. What it does do is give you an entertaining movie night.

Highly recommended for genre movie buffs, gangster film geeks, and Lee Marvin fans.

OBLIVION

This review is going to be a little bias. I freaking love OBLIVION! While the film is nothing original, it is in fact directed with such visual style that I couldn't keep my eyes off of the screen. Even during the slow parts I was in awe of film and it's IMAX presentation. OBLIVION not being in 3D was a nice cherry on top as well!

OBLIVION takes place in 2077. Sixty years earlier Earth was attacked by aliens called Scavengers. During the invasion things got ugly just like in any war. The Moon was destroyed and in a last ditch effort to win, Earth launched all it's nuclear weapons to defeat the Scavs (Scavengers for short). After the war Earth became unable to support life. The human race now lives either on Titan (one of Saturn's moons) or the giant space station called the Tet, which orbits Earth's atmosphere.

Tom Cruise plays Technician #49 Jack Harper. Jack and communications officer Victoria are part of an operation to extract the planet's remaining resources, primarily water for the people now living on Titan. The space station Tet is basically mission control for Jack and Victoria.

What remain of the alien Scavs are basically resistance fighters. In the event of Jack and Victoria ever getting captured by the Scavs they have underwent a memory wipe five years prior in case of capture and interrogation. Jack's primary job is the maintenance and support of 'drones' which patrol the landscape to destroy any remaining Scavs and protect the resource retraction machines. In the final weeks of their operation Jack has begun having dreams and flashbacks of New York City before the invasion. In his dreams he keeps seeing a woman that is not his teammate and part-time lover.

Days before Jack and Victoria are to return to the Tet, a spacecraft crashes on the surface. Jack investigates to find a number of sleeping capsules. One of the capsules contains Julia, the woman from his flashbacks. Soon after, Jack and Julia are captured by Scavs who are revealed to be humans living underground. Their leader, Malcolm Beech (played by Morgan Freeman), claims there are no aliens on the planet and insists that Jack sees things their way and demands that he reprograms a captured drone to destroy the Tet.

Jack refuses and Malcolm lets him go but not without telling him to venture out beyond the so called radiation zones, it is there that Jack will have all the answers he needs.

The story of OBLIVION provides nothing new, we've seen and heard these stories before. From the trailers you can piece together that Morgan Freeman's character is really the good guy and Tom Cruise's Jack has been helping the true bad guys all along. The good news is that OBLIVION isn't I AM LEGEND 2.

I love science fiction but by no means do I consider myself a science fiction geek. I love the classics like THE MATRIX, 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, PLANET OF THE APES, and THE TERMINATOR. But when I sit down and watch something like STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION I don't understand half the scientific jargon they are talking about nor do I care. Moviegoers like myself and geeks of sci-fi will quickly discover the 'twist' inside OBLIVION but director Joseph Kosinski makes the film shine through the cliches. The world he has created here is absolutely stunning.

I always come from the school of thought that it's not how original your movie is, but rather it's how you tell your story. OBLIVION borrows from many many other science fiction stories and films, but the film is pure genre and revels in pure 70's science fiction film homage; therefore, I give it a full pardon of not being original.

I highly recommend OBLIVION!

Spoilers! Well, sort of.

The ending of the movie had me seriously thinking, did Tom Cruise just denounce Scientology?

EVIL DEAD (2013)

Nothing about horror movies excites me anymore it seems. Nowadays it's all 80's horror icons re imagined, hacking and slashing away at unlikeable Abercrombie and Fitch models. Or what's possibly worse is that our vampires, werewolves, and zombies all have to be sexy now. Lame. The other end of the spectrum isn't all that great either. When the horror genre isn't appealing to teenagers or stay at home soccer mom's, it goes overboard to the tasteless gory torture porn extreme. Does anybody remember that JAWS all taught us that less is more? But what if the movie is meant to be a splatter house blood soaking horror show? Then make it fun maybe even a little humorous, just don't get lost in the tasteless gore. Who am I to tell someone what they should and should not like? There is no accounting for taste. Bottom line is I don't like tasteless gore in my horror movies, the keyword there is tasteless.

When it comes to the Evil Dead movies I love EVIL DEAD II more than the original. It was the first one I saw of the trilogy and is my favorite of the series. It was either 1987 or 1988 when I saw EVIL DEAD II for the first time on good old HBO, A.K.A “The Babysitter”. It was one of the most original and entertaining movies I had ever seen. It was probably the first multi genre movies I had ever seen too. It had everything; horror, action, and comedy. It is and forever shall be one of my favorite movies.

The original EVIL DEAD was a film I didn't get around to seeing until well after ARMY OF DARKNESS. Something about EVIL DEAD did not appeal to me. I had know for quite awhile that it was not humorous like it's sequel but serious, scary, and gory very gory. The time had finally come so my friends and I rented it one afternoon (because we were too scared to watch it at night) and we hated it. We like our slapstick Evil Dead thank you very much. We hated that the movie was so grim and the violence and gore was serious in nature. Yuck. No thanks.

* I want to be clear that I do not think that EVIL DEAD is tasteless. The filmmakers set out to make a scary horror movie.

Over the years I've grown to appreciate EVIL DEAD the more I see it but it's still my least favorite of the series.

For years fans have wanted a fourth Evil Dead film but the original filmmakers have said no, until just recently. So EVIL DEAD IV looks to be happening but it also seems like they are going to call it ARMY OF DARKNESS II. Too early to know for certain. What is certain is that producers Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell along with director Fede Alvarez have made an amazing remake.

My biggest fear with EVIL DEAD (2013) was no slapstick, no Ash, and too much emphasis on torture porn gore. I felt this was catering to a new generation of horror audiences, people that love evil winning and monsters that kill the hero. I underestimated Fede Alvarez big time!

I won't argue that this new film is a remake, but it just felt more like an expanded universe Evil Dead story to me. The nods to the original are much much more than winks to the fans if you ask me. Time will tell.

Five friends head to a remote cabin to help their friend Mia quit heroin. This isn't the first time they've tried to make her quit. No matter what happens no matter how hard Mia begs, they are not leaving until she's clean. Siblings David and Mia haven't been to the family cabin for a long time and since then, some strange stuff has been going on. The discovery of a Book of the Dead leads to the summoning of some demons in the woods. The evil possesses them until one is left to fight for survival.

At first the pacing is a little slow and none of the five friends are all that likable. Mia played by Jane Levy did an amazing job. Everybody else seemed one dimensional which is too common in horror movies today. If the rest of the cast had just a little more to work with in regards to their characters I may have been a little more invested in them. One character in particular, Eric, his curiosity in the Book of the Dead came off as cliché rather than believable curiosity.

Yes, no traces of EVIL DEAD II are to be found in this remake. The gore and horror are serious; however, it's done in such a way that yes it's gross but not once did I get the sense the movie is glorifying the gore.

For me the real star of the picture was the use of practical effects. No CGI gore here at all from what I can tell. I hate CGI blood and gore. Hate it!

I highly recommend EVIL DEAD (2013) only if you love horror movies, and I do stress love. I liked the movie but when the film reached that final act, I absolutely loved it! It brought me to that level of excitement that KILL BILL VOL.1 did.

Kudos to Sam Raimi, Bruce Campbell, and Fede Alvarez for opening this universe again.

A few thoughts on the 85th Academy Awards

I cannot help but to continue to watch the Oscars, it's my love of movies.  Who will win Best Picture this year at the 85th Academy Awards?  I really want DJANGO UNCHAINED to win but sadly it doesn't stand a chance I'm afraid.  The award will more than likely go to ARGO who is sweeping up other Best Picture awards in various guilds.  So it's a safe bet ARGO will be the big winner.  The only opposition I see for ARGO is LINCOLN or SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK.  I'd be happy if ARGO won, I really love that movie but among all the nominees DJANGO UNCHAINED has my vote for "best picture".

For me it's hard to tell who will walk away with the award for Best Director?  I'm going to play it safe and predict Steven Spielberg for LINCOLN.

The Best Actor In A Leading Role award should go to Joaquin Phoenix for THE MASTER; however, the award will go to Daniel Day Lewis for his amazing performance as Abraham Lincoln in LINCOLN.  What I'd like to know is where are the nominations for Liam Neeson?  He was amazing in THE GREY!  And what about Matthew McConaughey for KILLER JOE?

As far as Best Actress In a Leading Role goes, I haven't the slightest idea. I've only seen two of the movies in this category which puts me at a disadvantage. It's a shot in the dark but I'll say the award will go to Emmanuelle Riva for AMOUR. I personally think it's still to early for Jennifer Lawrence to nab a Oscar but her time will come I'm sure of it.

Tommy Lee Jones seems like the shoe in for Best Actor In a Supporting Role for LINCOLN. I'd be perfectly happy with that win but Christoph Waltz was amazing as usual in DJANGO UNCHAINED that I cannot help but root for him again.

While I thought that THE MASTER was underwhelming as a whole, I did however love the performances. Amy Adams deserves the award for Best Actress in a Supporting Role because deep down I felt it was her character “running the show” the entire time. It's subtle but it's there.

One more award I'm going to talk about. The one that I honestly care about most this year and that is the award for Best Cinematography. Roger Deakins must, I repeat must receive this years award for his beautiful work on SKYFALL. This is his year! Don't let me down Academy.

SUSHI GIRL

My finally getting to see SUSHI GIRL couldn't have come at a better time. Quentin Tarantino is a big influence on me and some of my recent script ideas over the past few years. It's very important to me that his influence never turns into copying. I loved SUSHI GIRL but in the end it reminded me what not to do.

SUSHI GIRL is an homage more or less to Tarantino, the heist genre, and exploitation film goodness.

Six years ago Fish went to prison. Six years alone. Six years he kept his mouth shut about the robbery, about the other men involved, and about the diamonds. The night he is released, the four men he protected with silence celebrate his freedom with a congratulatory dinner. In Japanese Yakuza tradition the feast is an array of Sushi served off the naked body of a woman. The woman is trained to be catatonic and ignore anything and everything that happens in the room. And I do mean anything.

So as you can imagine things get pretty heated as the thieves open old wounds over dinner finding out what happened to the missing diamonds. While technically being original a lot of this reminded me of the film RESERVOIR DOGS especially with all the flashbacks and torture scenes. The filmmakers did a good job of making an homage to Tarantino, but the lesson learned is that there is only one Quentin Tarantino.

The best thing about SUSHI GIRL is Mark Hamill (CORVETTE SUMMER) . He chews a lot of scenery here. Sometimes he lays it on pretty thick but the majority of the time he is amazing. I was getting tired of his shtick but by the third act he was really selling his character. Great stuff. Worth the price of admission alone. Being a low budget film and looking well made was another thing that really impressed me. I believe the budget was only a million dollars I think? I don't know for sure? It definitely looks more expensive than it probably was to make. The icing on the cake was the wonderful cameos from Grade A B-Movie actors like Danny Trejo, Jeff Fahey, and Michael Biehn.

My only complaint which is going to sound like a nit pick is one of the films music cues. The director of SUSHI GIRL should spend some time in Movie Jail for using the song 'Diamonds Are Forever' during the opening credits. I know DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER isn't the best James Bond 007 film but this type of borrowing just feels wrong,something you just don't do unless you know 100% that you're going to do it better. It didn't work for me. Gutsy move in my opinion.

Time will tell if SUSHI GIRL will become a cult classic or just be remembered as a Tarantino rip-off. It's definitely an homage but to call it a rip-off is way too easy and obvious. There are far worse rip-offs, far far worse.

If you like heist and or exploitation films then I rate SUSHI GIRL a must see.

A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD

LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD wasn't the best Die Hard film in the series but believe me when I tell you that A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD makes LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD look like the original film that started it all. And no the new film doesn't suck because John McClane 2.0 is even more superhuman this time around. The movie sucks because it's one of the most laziest action films I've seen in quite awhile. TAKEN 2 has more of a pulse than this!

Going back to what I said about the new John McClane from LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD not being a problem, that's correct he's not. In fact Bruce Willis playing John McClane is the best thing about A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD. He's having more fun with this character than he did in the previous installment. What's embarrassing is that Bruce Willis is the only one in the cast and apparently the crew as well that knows he is in a Die Hard movie! Everything else besides Bruce's performance feels like something taken out of a generic action movie.

Before I blame 20th Century Fox for releasing something so bland with 'Die Hard' in the title and on the 25th Anniversary of DIE HARD mind you, lets look at who wrote and directed this piece of crap. Written by Skip Woods (X-MEN ORIGINS: WOLVERINE) and directed by John Moore (THE OMEN:666, MAX PAYNE), nuff' said.

Director John Moore does know where to put the camera but too often he loves the shaky cam and slow motion. He also likes to blow stuff up but his action scenes come across very uninteresting. After what felt like a 15 minute car chase scene I was starting to feel a little sleepy.

John McClane finds out his son Jack has gotten himself in trouble and is going to prison in Russia. So like any loving father would do, John travels to Russia with hopes of getting his son out of the jam he is in. What John doesn't know is that his son is a CIA agent working on a big assignment involving one of the big wigs involved with the Cold War and Chernobyl. So in the grand tradition of being at the wrong place at the wrong time, father and son team up to do what McClane's do best and that's kill bad guys.

Somewhere hidden within the convoluted plot, one dimensional villains, shaky cam, and generic action the movie does have shining moments when John tries to bond with his son Jack. These moments are too few and far between.

I mentioned one dimensional villains, the bad guys in A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD have to be the worst in the history of the franchise.

I've raged enough, sorry. Bottom line, A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD is a terrible entry into the series and a mediocre action movie at best.

RISE OF THE ZOMBIES

Danny "Machete" Trejo verses zombies! Sold.  What could possibly go wrong ?  The script, the acting, CGI, the script, and Mariel Hemingway.  Mariel Hemingway?  I thought Danny Trejo killing zombies was the star? Nope. Damn, figures.

RISE OF THE ZOMBIES has one of the strongest casts for an Asylum Studio movie I've seen to date. You have Danny Trejo, LeVar Burton, Ethan Suplee, French Stewart, and Mariel Hemingway who I thought was dead.

Don't quote me on this but I'm willing to bet that RISE OF THE ZOMBIES had it's debut on SyFy Channel then was realeased on video unrated with re shoots (French Stewart is not listed on IMDB but is in the movie) and given a leaner run time on video. I say this because a lot of the movie seems missing and focuses on the action. RISE OF THE ZOMBIES is directed by Nick Lyon the man behind ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE which sucked and was about a group of people dressed in cosplay lost in the city looking for comic con. I'm joking, but seriously the whole movie felt like people just walking around 2 hours. RISE OF THE ZOMBIES is a slight improvement with more focused direction.

In RISE OF THE ZOMBIES we have nothing original, just your run of the mill zombie fare. The zombie plague is because of a virus and there is rumor of a cure. Alcatraz is a safe haven that gets compromised so a team of survivors flee back to San Fransisco. The team breaks up with some looking for a cure and the others just seeking a place to fortify because they believe finding a cure is hopeless. Mariel Hemingway plays Dr. Lynn Snyder who leads the group that wants to find a cure which makes her the main character of RISE OF THE ZOMBIES. Danny Trejo plays Caspian who doesn't wanna waste time and anymore lives with searching for a cure and would rather find a safe place to bunker down. Caspian is a far more interesting character than Dr. Lynn Snyder.

At the start of the movie when Alcatraz gets over run by zombies It's Caspian who truly shines as a badass killing a lot of zombies. This is where RISE OF THE ZOMBIES was winning me over. So when the survivors split up I was really banking on Caspian doing the heroic thing and saving the group seeking the cure. Unfortunately Caspian gets bit and turns into a zombie 40 minutes in and RISE OF THE ZOMBIES then becomes boring until the last 10 minutes of the movie.

There is fun to be had watching RISE OF THE ZOMBIES with zombie dummies getting run over, bizarre use of CGI, head shots with no blood, and a baby turning into a zombie which is meant to be shocking but ends up being hilarious.

One thing about the movie that I don't think is a coincidence is the fact it's a THE WALKING DEAD cash-in. It's probably a stretch seeing that all zombie movies are about sticking together and surviving, but you really get that feeling this is The Asylum's money grab at THE WALKING DEAD popularity.

I cannot recommend RISE OF THE ZOMBIES for a bad movie night. It doesn't quite reach it's so bad it's good status. They shouldn't have killed off Danny Trejo so soon.

V/H/S

Now this is what I'm talking about! Sell that Paranormal Activity stuff to the tourists. It's upsetting the amount of money PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 3 and 4 have raked in. V/H/S is the found footage horror film that audiences really need to rally behind. The good news is that the movie has seen some moderate success and enough of a following to justify a sequel S-V/H/S. I cannot wait to see it.

It was a good thing that the success of PARANORMAL ACTIVITY helped kill the gore fest horror movies like the SAW franchise. What followed was the return of ghost stories and scary spirits films. Too bad we've had maybe three or four good movies in this genre and the rest have been terrible PARANORMAL ACTIVITY knock offs.

V/H/S breaths new life in the found-footage horror genre. It's a horror anthology film much like CREEPSHOW and TALES FROM THE DARKSIDE: THE MOVIE. The found-footage gimmick comes into play by the movie centered around a group of hoodlums that go around filming mischief and sell the tapes for $50. The hoodlums are hired to break into a house to steal a tape. The break in is a success but they stumble upon a room with several televisions and vhs players. They split up with some searching for the tape and some watching the tapes laying around the room with the televisions. This segment is the wraparound that connects the anthology together.

The first tape shows a bunch of horny college boys hitting the clubs and bars hoping to get laid and capturing it on video with a secret camera. The boys get more than they bargained for when one of the girls they bring back to their hotel room is a real “woman of the night”.

Part of this segment if not all of it was filmed in Colombia, MO which was cool to notice. The gore was real impressive and accompanied the found-footage ascetic really well. The use of the secret camera was original too. A very strong start for an anthology film.

“Second Honeymoon” the title of the second tape was creepy and kept you in suspense of what was going to happen next. Shocking moments mixed with some dark humor from director Ti West makes this entry pretty cleaver.

I should mention that after every tape the movie goes back to what is happening in the house with the hoodlums. They start disappearing one after one until all whose left is the leader of the crew.

Okay, so now I forget what video actually came third, it might be the one called “Tuesday the 17th” which is about some teens driving to a lake somewhere in the woods. It's a slasher film segment which was good but I felt could have been better.

“The Sick Thing That Happened to Emily When She Was Younger” was my least favorite segment. It's Paranormal Activity with Skype and a twist of lime.

The last video “10/31/98” was my favorite. A group of guys go looking for a party at a haunted house. This was the best segment. A lot of crazy stuff happens and it's the right amount of scary and cool.

I highly recommend V/H/S to anyone that loves horror movies. It breaths the much needed new life in found-footage horror. V/H/S could easily be the new October tradition with it's anthology format always leaving the door open for ideas.

TOP GUN - IMAX 3D

January and February are typically slow months for movie theaters. If you're lucky your local neighborhood multiplex theater will showcase some Oscar bait before the big award show, but for the most part you get crap movies that studios don't know what to do with like SIDE EFFECTS.

I have wanted to see a few like HANSEL AND GRETEL: WITCH HUNTERS, BULLET TO THE HEAD, and GANGSTER SQUAD but after being kinda bored with TEXAS CHAINSAW 3D and PARKER, I'll just wait and rent them in the future. It was considered a bomb but THE LAST SATND should be an exception because that movie in fact kicked ass.

So Friday night with more movies than I know what to do with, I decided to play DEAD SPACE 3. After hours of survival horror video game madness raising my blood pressure going to the movies to relax sounded like a nice idea. So the only thing that interested me was seeing the re-release of TOP GUN in a special IMAX 3D presentation. Last year seeing RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK on the IMAX was awesome so naturally I thought the same for TOP GUN, turns out it was a different kind of awesome.

It was the last show for the evening and about 30 people showed up which is about right for a re-release in this day and age. The movie is about to start but at a few minutes before show time a couple of stragglers mosey on in. From the get go these guys seemed a little off by talking and joking loudly. Real quick the auditorium had this “Okay? What's up with these guys?” vibe to it. Turns out they were annoying during every preview which I won't get into because what happened next was amazing (not in a cool way).

These guys were the biggest TOP GUN fans in Springfield, MO! I'm not kidding. They knew every line, joke, moment, and what have you. Seriously one of them was laughing at a joke/funny moment seconds before it happened on screen. I could ramble on and on trying to describe the awkwardness that took place but it wouldn't measure up, you just had to be there which is cliché but true. The very best way for me to describe it is imagine Dwight Schrute and Micheal Scott at a theater watching their favorite movie of all time.

TOP GUN on the IMAX wasn't as cool as I thought it'd be. The 3D was worthless which did not surprise me. I wish 3D would just go away. Over the years TOP GUN has lost it's edge but it still has that 80's pop culture thing going for it which is cool.

TEXAS CHAINSAW 3D

Make no mistake, TEXAS CHAINSAW 3D isn't very good but for the most part I liked the movie. The experience of TEXAS CHAINSAW 3D was that of a modern day “grindhouse” exploitation flick. I loved how the opening credits showed the original 1974 film in recap form. That seems like something a true exploitation film would do.

After the opening credits TEXAS CHAINSAW 3D picks up where the 1974 film left off and has a bunch of the townsfolk burn the Sawyer house to the ground. The odd thing about this scene for all the original TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE fans out there is the sudden addition of all the Sawyer family members inside the house? Continuity error for sure but I had fun with it in a “exploitation film” kinda way. Speaking of continuity errors, the movie's main character was born in 1974 and is obviously twenty-something in 2012 where our story takes place? This definitely has to be one of the strangest “blunders” in a theatrical movie I've seen in a long time. What were the powers-at-be thinking? How can a major studio like Lionsgate let something like this slide? This is something I'd expect out of a cheep cash-in exploitation movie! Wait. Oh... I get it.

Somewhere in Texas 20 years after the burning down of the Sawyer house killing everyone inside, a young woman named Heather receives an inheritance from a grandmother she never knew she had. To learn more about this inheritance business Heather and her friends take a road trip to her late grandmothers estate only to find out that Heather is now the proud owner of a mansion. Unbeknownst to Heather and her friends that the lone survivor of the Sawyer house raid, Leatherface lurks in the basement below.

What happens next is your typical paint-by-numbers who is Leatherface going to kill next slasher movie fare; however, the atmosphere was quite creepy and the gore was good and not overly nasty.

In the films final act it takes this horror revisionist left-turn at who the “real” bad guys are and while it didn't ruin the movie for me it did leave a bad taste in my mouth. Monsters should die in slasher films! Period!

In closing TEXAS CHAINSAW 3D is a poor cash-in of the original film. My opinion may change but as of now despite all the problems with this new movie, I still prefer it over the polished remake and prequel from Platinum Dunes.

Die hard fans of the original THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE (which I am not) will hate on this for sure but I'll go ahead and recommend TEXAS CHAINSAW 3D to horror movie fans, especially exploitation film fans.

LES MISERABLES (2012)

I typically don't go for this stuff it's not my thing. Musicals is a genre I always try to keep an open mind about. I like the “big production” movie musicals. I'd say it's the least film genre I hunt down but when I find a classic one that I haven't seen I try to watch it. Films like Baz Luhrmann's MOULIN ROUGE kill my interest fast!

About 5 years ago on a vacation in New York City I had the privilege to see WICKED on Broadway. It left me speechless and forever with respect for stage production.

I don't know the history of the LES MISERABLES Broadway musical except for that it was a smash hit sensation from the 80's. The production has it's detractors saying that it's not very good that it's over bloated with a lot of pizazz and the source material is way too much ground to cover for a Broadway show. After seeing the film and getting lost a few times in the passage of time I could agree that this story is a lot to take in, even for a 150+ minute movie.

LES MISERABLES felt to me as if I was watching the Cliff Notes version of the Musical and novel. If I hadn't watch the adaptation from 1998 way back when and vaguely remember from that what was going on story wise, I'd be completely lost in this new movie and consider it one of the worst movie's of 2012. It took me about 20 minutes to settle in and appreciate and understand the flow of director Tom Hooper's vision. Once I settled in it became more and more entertaining.

The backdrop is 19th Century France and our main character is recently paroled criminal Jean Valjean. Valjean is a freeman but will always be under the watchful eye of the law forever under parole thanks to the ruthless policeman Javert. So Jean Valjean tries and tries but to no avail cannot get work. Frustrated and desperate he steals some valuables from a church. He gets caught and is set to go back to prison but the priest or bishop (I can't remember) tells the police that he gave Valjean these items. With Valjean's second chance he eventuality becomes a mayor. Feeling guilty for ignoring a desperate plea from factory worker and young mother Fantine, Jean Valjean takes it upon himself to raise Fantine's daughter Cosette. This decision will change their lives forever with always being on the run from Javert and Cosette eventuality falling in love with a lad involved with a student led revolution against the government.

I wanna say all these events take place over a twenty year time span I think. This is a lot to take in. Like I mentioned earlier if I had not known a little bit about the story like I did going in, then I'd be lost and severely criticizing the film. The edits are jarring and time lapses a lot with jump cuts. When Jean Valjean gets his second chance thanks to the priest and all, the very next scene is a jump cut and Valjean is a mayor. It's like I said Cliff Notes version.

Hidden in all the break neck pace and jump cut editing is actually a style and continuity I found myself amazed at and enjoying quite a bit. Some of it works and some of it does not in my opinion.

I liked how the filmmakers chose to make this adaptation ugly because quite frankly ugly is the correct tone for a story like this. The choice for live singing was a good one. This isn't a pretty soundtrack. I'm just trying to say that not everything is candy coated and easy to swallow. These voices are full of passion, pain, anger, and sometimes love. A lot of the performances are captured beautifully with tight close-ups and you really feel the performances. My favorite of these moments was Fantine played by Anne Hathaway who has a very powerful 4 minutes of screen time with a solo that is amazing!

Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway really give it their all here. It's true what everyones been saying about Russell Crowe, he's just not very good here. I didn't hate his performance but I did think he wasn't playing Javert evil enough. It felt to me that he was just phoning it in.

Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter were great as Thenardier and Madame Thenardier. They both brought some well needed comic relief to liven things up a bit here and there.

Honestly by the end of the movie I felt they rushed the third act with the student led revolution and love triangle between Cosette, Marius, and Eponine. And with a run time of 2 ½ hours already invested I would have been fine with a 3 hour movie. When this comes out on blu-ray and is an extended edition I'd probably watch it again. Probably.

I can't give this a solid recommendation. I was just curious enough and found it to be just entertaining enough that I was glad I saw it. If you're a die hard fan of the musical you may find yourself having extreme mixed feelings overall because this is a different approach to the musical, you probably won't want to sing-a-long with the movie like you were planning to.

Thoughts on 48fps High Frame Rate

This weekend watching THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY in the High Frame Rate (48fps) format was bittersweet. I loved every minute of it (with the exception of characters in the foreground appearing to be moving in fast-forward from time to time). Everything on screen looks real! The mountains of gold inside Erebor is a sight to behold.

My biggest compliment to HFR & 3D is that while you do have to wear 3D glasses, the image is so crisp and clear that it seems like you are not wearing glasses at all. No blurring effect from the 3D at all. The movie had moments of focusing in and out but that was probably only to give the presentation more of a film quality to it. The HFR also brings out the best in CGI. Nothing can take you out of a film quicker than CGI. With HFR I found myself continuously wondering what was computer generated and what was miniature.

Director Peter Jackson loves to do both and here it is seemingly flawless. The best example I can give is that there is a scene in his King Kong film where a bunch of people are running away from dinosaurs, if you don't remember I'm reminding you that it looked like crap. Everything about that scene was flat and blurry. In THE HOBBIT a similar scene takes place as our band of merry Dwarves and Gandalf are running for their lives in Goblin Town. The action is flawless and no blur whatsoever.

Here's where the bittersweetness comes in; I love film, I love 24fps it has a realness to it whereas 48fps looses that “look” we movie lovers all appreciate. I think the trick is and what ultimately makes THE HOBBIT shown in 48fps work is that the movie is still cinematic, very cinematic. A lot of kinks in the format need to be fixed and more than likely will as technology moves forward. This format won't be for every genre and I hope Hollywood sees that, sadly they won't so choose your HFR movies carefully.