ForceSmash

[forcesmash]

Review: The Hunger Games

The Hunger Games, essentially an American-romantisized  version of the Japanese film Battle Royale, has found itself a cult following that few series rarely achieve. It has the rare quality of having something for everyone in that it combines science fiction, gladiatorial death, socialism and romance. Fun for the whole family. Now it has been made into a full length feature film, and if you haven't heard anything about this "phenomenon" its worth a look.

The movie is acutally pretty effective as it ditches most of  the melodrama and romantic conflicts that bogged down a good amount of the book. Without being inside Katniss' head we are forced to watch her reactions and more focus is placed on the action and events rather than her conflicting feelings. These reactions can only be pulled off by a good actress, and thankfully they cast one in Jennifer Lawrence. I first saw Jennifer in Winters Bone a few years ago and was immediately interested in her abilities. She is an honest actor, subtle in her performances and commands every scene she is in. With her alone, this movie is made better as we can at all times know what she is thinking. Its a rare gift to be able to carry a movie this way, but she more than rises to the challenge.

With directing duties Gary Ross (Seabiscut) uses many interesting styles as it pertains to the situation and tone. The outdated shaky cam techniques can be an eyesore, but it proves to be effective in some combat scenes where kids are getting gutted. In situations where some directors might call for tone music he lets the scene fall silent, relying on the sound effects and quiet to carry the scene. Its a great technique that David Yates mastered really well in the final few Potter films.

One thing about this story that bugged me is how everyone accepts their place and few question its process. Its an attitude of "this is how things are, no matter how morally degraded the whole thing is...this is our life". Being that the film is over 2 1/2 hours as it is I wouldn't have wanted an extra 30 minutes to explore this, but it almost feels like a missed opportunity to flesh out these issues and develop a social commentary on the whole situation.

Overall my minor complaints are just that. Considering the filmakers were often limited by the source material, they came up with a memorable film. Its nice to see a studio hire good actors and crew who are sure to give creative thought towards the project rather than cranking out an assembly-line film. For every Lord of the Rings there is a Twilight and this film thankfully soars closer to the former.

8 out of 10

[forcesmash]

Review: The Avengers

I can only blame myself for being disappointed by The Avengers.

I see that now.

Years of eagerly watching films introduce characters, motives and plots led to this moment. A director was chosen I was confident could give Christopher Nolan and his Bat-series a run for its money. An all-star cast assembled for the ultimate fight against evil. Not a single unattractive person was hired in the making of this film. Yet after years of work and devotion, we are left with nothing but...an entertaining film. What in the name of Thor?

I would have been tackled and thrown out of that meeting with whispers of insanity following me home. But a seed might have been planted.

I digress...

Avengers is not a bad film, in fact it is actually has moments of brilliance and could easily be called good. However when good could have been great I find myself disappointed. Historically, this is where I would chastise the director, but with Avengers I don't believe that would be fair. Yes, the first 80 minutes are composed of exciting opportunities bogged down by clunky storytelling, mild character development and less-than-epic action sequences, but lets view two facts:

1. Marvel is a controlling empire mainly interested in connecting its franchises:

I admire what Marvel did in financing 5 films to lead to this ultimate group-outing. In this day and age of cinema its not only a risky movie, its a damned bold one. For the most part it was a success: we came into the film seeing characters we knew and cared about. However with that agenda comes control: a fact proven with the significant clamp-down from the creative "Iron Man" to the terrible "Iron Man 2" (a control of property so drastic that Director John Favreau refused to do Iron Man 3 because creative liberty was no longer given).

I have no doubt that Joss Whedon had great and crazy ideas for the direction of Avengers. However I would bet much of it was sacrificed to tie into the inevitable sequel reveal during the credits. As a result we are left with a picture that hits its obligatory A, B C and D points with Whedon only allowed to contribute on the occasional jabs of humor (and thank god for that).

2. Hire enough top actors, scheduling is going to be an issue

In an interview leading up to the release of Avengers, Whedon confessed his frustration of having to film, and sometime rewrite the script, around the actors schedules. So while Downy Jr. was needed to film 10 scenes with Chris Evans, his Sherlock Holmes re-shoots only can afford him to be in 5 scenes...and so it goes with others.

The problem is that this is painfully noticeable. Blame will be misplaced in blogs that there are too many characters to juggle, but handling multiple characters is what Whedon built his career on. The best scenes come when the entire team is together in conversation or battle, yet there are only really three of these scenes in the movie.

What hurts the films flow, particularly in the first 80 minutes, is that once the team is assembled they are then randomly separated in ways that don't seem logical, and it can be a distraction. The film ultimately suffers because whenever it gains some steam, one of these situations (read: rewrites) seemed to stall its momentum.

That's all the complaining I'm going to do on this film. I have other minor gripes, but its not worth diving into. Lets discuss things 5 things I liked...

1. The Hulk - Saved this movie, pure and simple. They hit the ferocity of Hulk more than two whole  movies before. Also spot on with Bruce Banner Mr. Ruffalo.

2. Robert Downy Jr. - If you have seen the movie, or any of the Iron Man films...you know.

3. Great humor - The most genuinely funny superhero lines ever delivered. Too many good ones to quote..."He's my brother!" "He killed 80 people in two days!" "Hes...adopted". The film is filled with gems that alone warrant a re-watch.

4. Black Widow - Aside from my ScarJo with red-hair infatuation this might be the only hero besides Tony Stark who receives forward progress in their character development

5. Cleveland gets the spotlight - Many of the final sequences were shot in Cleveland. A solid action finale fully unveiling the strengths of each Avenger. I admired the coherency with which this was shot...it could have easily been very confusing to follow but really pulled you in.

In the end can I be disappointed that the film played by the numbers delivering top-notch popcorn fare? Am I asking too much in my superhero movies for a deeper meaning behind the mask, a look at a tortured soul or a villain that truly challenges their nemesis to make the hard choices?

That is for you to decide. I recommend seeing this movie for the fun it is. I will get my complex superhero kicks from The Dark Knight Rises in 2 1/2 months.

7 out of 10

[forcesmash]

Review: The Dark Knight Rises

Rating: 9 out of 10

After a span of nine years writing, shooting and editing we are at the final chapter of Christopher Nolan's Batman saga, where the Dark Knight Legend ends. One director making a trilogy and ending it with quality is often historically disastrous (we look at you Spiderman 3) but after four years of speculation and anticipation we are treated to an truly epic finale and possibly the most ambitious comic boook film every made.

One of the strengths with Nolan's Batman trilogy, and especially in this film, is that he understands the complex relationship between Bruce Wayne, Batman and Gotham City. Wayne is fleshed out brilliantly by Christian Bale and Gotham City is practically a character all it's own. You see, without Gotham there is no Batman and Bruce Wayne is a empty shell without his caped persona. Each survives by the existence of the other. When you see Batman you are witnessing the true Bruce Wayne; the millionaire playboy is an act, a charade meant to distract from his useless existence. The Batman is Wayne's inner struggle to avenge become the protector to whom he failed to save as a child: his parents. Gotham is therefore a substitute, a full projection of Wayne's parents, something he can protect from death. Batman's fight for the soul of Gotham has forever tied the murder of his parents to the identity of himself. This is a very complex character study executed consistently across the trilogy and when Wayne is forced to helplessly watch his city suffer, it is fully illustrated by his pain. Bane and his crew not only attack Bruce Wayne financially but also target Batman physically and Gotham destructively. It is a brilliantly constructed premise and pays off in ways I wouldn't dare spoil.

Selina Kyle "You don't owe these people anymore. You have given them everything."

Batman "Not everything. Not yet."

The rest of the acting is fantastic with Anne Hathaway being a significant standout. She received plenty of criticism after being cast in the role, a choice I personally never had a problem with. If you have seen her in Rachel Getting Married and, to a lesser extent, Love and other Drugs she is not hard to identify as a actress who enjoys extending her range. Here she delivers a perfect interpretation of Selina Kyle which avoids the traditional camp, substituting it with genuine wit and cunning. Likewise Bane (Tom Hardy) fills the villain role just fine as a truly menacing figure that falls short of Joker memorability but easily trumps Batman Begin's Scarecrow.

As much as I have praised the film, I have minor complaints. The screenplay suffers from introducing far too many characters and giving some more screen time than they deserve. Many of these characters float in and out of scenes and react in ways that serve more to move the story forward than to explain their motives. A great example of this would be Joseph Gordon-Levitt's character Blake, who appears in situations without logical explanation of how he knew to be there. Because of this he comes across as a pawn of the story, merely used when some good guy is needed in a scene. Even though he gets the most screen-time of any new character in Rises, he lacks a compelling character arc. Had Blake been introduced in The Dark Knight with development that continued in Rises maybe his continual presence would not have felt so awkward.

Summary: You can't fault Christopher Nolan for wanting to tell as many interesting stories as he can in his final Batman outing, but sometimes these decisions drag and prohibit full momentum in the story.

Despite these minor complaints the film has a great climax and offers many scenes deserving of the "epic" description. More importantly it ties the first two films together in a satisfying way giving us one complete story of the Wayne/Gotham/Batman saga. The Dark Knight Rises offers the most satisfying conclusion we could have had to this fantastic franchise. I'm sad to see it end, but enjoyed every part of the journey.

by David Posadny (Follow on twitter @dposadny)

[forcesmash]

The Batman Tragedy: a week of reflection

By David Posadny

I began this article earlier in the week to summarize and comment on the controversy surrounding the early reviews and reactions of The Dark Knight Rises. Little did I, or anyone for that matter, expect there to be a massacre at a 12am showing of The Dark Knight Rises resulting in the death of 12 people on Friday morning. I have therefore re-editing the article as I believe there is value in revisiting the events of both controversies and what can be learned from them.

The first part of our controversy started July 16th, 2012 when Marshall Fine of Hollywood and Fine Reviews posted a negative review of The Dark Knight Rises revealing spoilers from the movie and giving it harsh criticisms:

Since Marshall is considered a journalist, his review posted to review site rottentomatoes.com for consideration. For those unfamiliar with this site, Rotten Tomatoes combines reviews from journalists and moviegoers into one site and takes the bad reviews off of the percentage of good ones to give the film its final "score". Currently The Dark Knight Rises is sitting at a 86% "fresh" rating basically summarizing that 86% of critics recommend the film. As more good reviews started coming in, it was the less favorable ones that took the heat and Christy Lemire became the second famous reviewer to down the film:

These critisisms did not sit well with fan boys, who obviously had expectations that the film, which they themselves had yet to see, would be nothing short of a 100% on the Rotten Tomatoes scale. Their anger when it dropped to 97% and then to 95% began to grow and show itself on the sites of the reviewers. 

Most of the comments from fan boys were dismissal: 

"You sir are a fool, what a terrible review" - Jake

Some took the reviews personally:

"I seriously hate you! i know everyone is entitled to there own opinion but [you] are an idiot and a fool" - Josh

 While others took their opinions to the traditional internet low:

"Honestly, you’re a real a&$hole. Hope you enjoy a life of lonely, bitter existence" - Selina

"I would like to say you are a complete *%&$ bag trolling piece of trash and you *$&#(@ suck monkey %&#(" - Jason

These comments are offensive, but harmless by themselves. Unfortunately they opened up the floodgates for others to bash the reviewers gender and race, along with the eventual shocking death threats.

Death threats, over a movie review. According to Rotten Tomatoes "One poster said he wanted Fine to die in a fire. Another fantasized about beating Fine to death with a thick rubber hose". Internet users were vowing to take a persons life because they wrote about a movie unfavorably, because they failed to give it that perfect rating. Most of the threats have been removed from the sites, perhaps a mercy to the faceless cowards who made them, but the damage had been done and Rotten Tomatoes suspended all comments on their site saying "There are plenty of other things to get angry about, like war, famine, poverty and crime. But not movie reviews.". It wouldn't be until 3 days later that their words would prove to be all too true.

July 20th, 2012 - 12:35AM

James Holmes walks into a crowded midnight showing of The Dark Knight Rises in Aurora, Colorado and opens fire on the entire crowd in an attempt at mass murder. Chaos ensues and over 50 people are wounded, 10 are dead on scene and 2 eventually die later (By comparison the infamous Columbine High School Massacres, 13 miles from the Batman shootings, killed 13 people and wounded 23*). Holmes is now in police custody and will have to answer for his actions, and for the 12 lives he senselessly took.

Americans woke up Friday morning to read about a crime we didn't expect, at a venue we could not have predicted during a movie that had stirred up so much controversy earlier that week. Controversy that now seems trivial and inane. All that rage and hate over disagreeing on a movie or the 86% online score it received is finally put into glaring perspective. It doesn't matter.

So how do the people, who days ago unleashed hate against someone they didn't know, feel today? They should be rethinking their entire life right at this moment. The "Jake", "Jason" and "Selina's" should forever prioritize their actions by the events of Friday and how it stacks against their earlier comments.

People died - innocent people - children.

Whatever has been said before cannot be taken back, but things must not go back to the internet hate we saw earlier this week. I realize I'm kidding myself to think that once this whole thing blows over Avengers 2 will not follow the same patterns from a younger generation who will easily forget these events. However, the guilt that should be felt by people who handed down death threats so casually deserves to weigh on them for quite some time. If no course is altered in their perspective then there really is no lesson learned and will therefore surely be repeated. This cannot, and should not be an issue we revisit anytime soon.

So what happens now? We mourn the loss in silence and continue on our lives. I will see The Dark Knight Rises on Saturday as I have planned to do for weeks. I will not be sitting at home in fear of being shot or out of misplaced guilt for the actions of others. I will take my wife out to dinner, and we will enjoy our night. I cannot forget the people who lost their lives, and prayers should daily be given for their families.

God knows they need it.

*Columbine statistics provided by CNN

[forcesmash]

Review: Savages

Drugs are a natural response to insanity

Savages is a film about bad people who do bad things to other bad people. In return the wronged bad people are forced to retaliate doing bad things to the bad people who wronged them. Clearly you can see how this can start to get muddled

This is all cut short when the boys turn down a deal offered by a powerful drug lord and O is kidnapped by big boss Elena (Salma Hayek). Elena is about as complex as villains come, one minute she is lovingly talking to her family and the next she is ordering a series of beheadings. These are carried out with flair by Lado (Benicio Del Toro) who kills without compassion and with a grating sense of enjoyment. Here the movie tangles a weave of heists, plots and backstabbing as the boys kill and steal to get O back into their arms.

The film is directed by Oliver Stone who is famous for portraying both historical figures (JFK, W) and serial murderers (Natural Born Killers). Here he brings his years of expertise to create a snappy, good looking film that most other directors would have bumbled given the paper thin script. It is what elevates the film to enjoyable despite the insipid ending. 

Summary: Savages is the worst good movie of the year. It’s characters are completely devoid of any moral conscience and the violence is often stomach churning. Nevertheless from a technical and filmmaking standpoint the film has much to offer as Stone elevates his actors and shots, it is here the film earns the majority of its score. Like Prometheus it channels a classic (now almost deceased) style of filmmaking that made many of the R-rated fanfare of the 80’s and 90’s so great. It is an interesting experiment, but be prepared to leave the theatre with some mixed feelings about what you just saw.

7 out of 10                                                         

Rated R (for for strong brutal and grisly violence, some graphic sexuality, nudity, drug use and language throughout

Reviewed by dposadny. Follow on twitter @dposadny

[forcesmash]

Review: Moonrise Kingdom

If you want to get married I can officiate, but I can't offer you a legally binding union. It won't hold up in the state, the county or frankly any courtroom in the world due to your age, lack of license and failure to get parental consent.

Full disclosure: I am a huge fan of Wes Anderson's work, and would recommend that people see more of his films than many directors I admire. Many of his films reach for style (Fantastic Mr. Fox, Darjeeling Limited, The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou) while others address a more personal curiosity with life, death and relationships (The Royal Tenenbaums, Rushmore, Bottle Rocket). It could be assumed that since I am a fan, my critique of his recent movie Moonrise Kingdom would be severely skewed. I would argue the fact that because I feel so deeply about Anderson films, that makes me his biggest critic. Before Fantastic Mr. Fox Anderson seemed to be in a rut of style-over-substance, creating beautiful images amidst a weaker storyline. Fox was a great return to form and from that success Anderson builds his career to Moonrise Kingdom, his best movie in years and maybe the most complete film of his career.  

I become fairly annoyed with the flippant overuse of the phrase "a coming of age story". I have heard this film referenced many times in this way and find it to be false from every angle. It is, above all else, a love story. Furthermore it is a love story between two young people who have no concept of what love feels or should look like. Because of this, it is perhaps the purest love story ever filmed and has a sincere Romeo and Juliet quality about it, as they seemed drawn together the more they are forced apart. I was sold on the performances of Kara Hayward (Suzy) and Jared Gilman (Sam) who, despite their delicate age, handled the snappy dialogue with sincerity and believability. 

The rest of the cast is great, as we would expect them to be. Edward Norton as a bewildered Campmaster who has his scouts continually desert camp is a special highlight. Bruce Willis, Bill Murray, Frances Mcdormand and Tilda Swinton all add their own flavor to the proceedings and Anderson-regular Jason Swartzman shines in a hilarious cameo. The movie feels complete because it has a definitive story arch and doesn't rely on filler visuals or circumstances. It feels complete because the character development also follows that arch and each person has a place in the telling.      

Summary: Moonrise Kingdom explores love at a delicate stage and how it can thrive among sadness. It is an excellent story told by fantastic visuals and heartfelt characters. It can make you feel young and root for the young who love. If this is playing near you, I highly encourage you to consider seeing it - It is, so far, my favorite film of the year.

10 out of 10

Reviewed by Dposadny. Follow on twitter @dposadny

[forcesmash]

Review: The Amazing Spiderman

There's rumor of a new species in New York. It can be aggressive, if threatened... 

Making a case against the unnecessary remakes and reboots that Hollywood is so fond of lately, one would submit The Amazing Spiderman as exhibit A*. Retelling an origin story we have already seen 10 years earlier is a risky gamble, even if you tweak the minor details it still amounts to been-there-seen-that at every turn. Surprisingly, The Amazing Spiderman isn't the rotten egg we all thought (and in some cases hoped) it would be. This is a film that somehow works because we have seen the story before and builds it in an interesting direction.

I have no great opinion of Andrew Garfield, who often looks like he is about to break down in tears every time he plays a character. Here he finds more of a balance with Parker, although for a good part of the running time its hard to buy him as the timid high school student. Emma Stone as Gwen Stacey is not only memorable but her chemistry with Garfield sells the relationship on its playfulness more than iconic visuals such as an upside-down kiss. The villain played by Rhys Ifans is fairly straightforward but succeeds in making us understand the motives as to why the character wants to turn everyone into monsters like him.

I liked how much of the origin story was underplayed, a choice greatly benefited by the fact we have seen it before. Here we get no epic slow motion shots of spiders biting or transformations. It simply happens and Parker has to adapt. This approach defies what we have been taught to expect from Superhero movies and so while it is initially unsettling, it is very much appreciated. Visually the film is striking, but the running time is too long and isn't helped by some cheesy "citizens help the wounded superhero" sequences that should have been struck down immediately once the idea was pitched. It isn't enough to kill the film, but it certainly pulls you out when you should be on the edge of your seat.

Summary: I found this movie appealing much in the same I did The Avengers, both hit the sweet spots of a summer superhero film**. They are wildly entertaining, well told and the action and directing are fantastic. Spiderman doesn't break any barriers, but that isn't the point. It presents us with a character and universe we can hopefully enjoy for years to come, lets just try and keep it over a decade this time.

7 out of 10

Reviewed by dposadny. Follow on twitter @dposadny

  *I have not forgotten The Hulk (2003) and The Incredible Hulk (2008), but these have the distinction of rebooting the actors, not the origin story itself.

** "Wait! You found the Avengers appealing? I thought your previous review didn't like it! Heretic!!" Avengers should have been so much more than it was but I found it to be an entertaining summer movie (7 of 10 like this one)

[forcesmash]

I can't decide if you're a detective or a pervert

Laura Dern in Blue Velvet

[forcesmash]

Review: Ted

Nothing is more powerful than the wish of a small boy. Except for an Apache helicopter. It has both machine guns and missiles. It is a pure death machine

Within 10 minutes of Ted’s beginning, you know exactly what kind of film you are getting. This is a classic-style buddy film with Family Guy humor using heavy references to 80’s pop and film culture. Ted is directed (and voiced) by Seth McFarlane, the creator of Family Guy and half the other animated shows currently on Fox. While many question much of his originality of humor (or if Family Guy is even funny anymore) you cannot deny that the guy has a passionate fan base and the full support of the industry behind him. With his television success he set his sights to write and direct a film about a boy who wishes that his teddy bear would come to life. When John (Mark Whalberg) gets his wish, he embarks on a 30 year relationship with his best and only fried . . . Ted.

I cannot determine if Seth McFarlane is in love with his own voice, but his range is revealed in this film as Ted sounds identical to Peter Griffin (a fact that is wisely winked at halfway through). The question must then be asked: if he knew the Ted sounded identical to the most recognizable Family Guy character enough to jest about it . . . why go through with the voice? Why not concede the role to someone who might give it a different spin. This observation is not a criticism of the film but reveals a problem with McFarlane’s creative process as his ego often eclipses what might the best choice for future projects. 

Summary: Ted is flawed in many ways. It sticks to the usual Seth McFarlane jokes and some secondary characters and plots should have been cut out of the film completely. Despite these minor complaints, Ted ranks as the funniest movie so far this year despite also being one of the crudest. It has a well-meaning character who will no doubt become a recognizable pop culture icon in the years to come. The movie Ted is funny, and if you go to see a comedy that is all you really ask for. 

8 out of 10

RatedR for crude and sexual content, pervasive language, and some drug use.

Follow on twitter @dposadny

[forcesmash]

Yuen Woo-ping, the Hong Kong film industry’s premier martial arts film action choreographer and director, is being honored for his contribution to one of the territory’s best-known genres at the Hong Kong in Focus special program at the 10th Paris Cinema Film Festival. The program, organized in collaboration with the Hong Kong International Film Festival, is opening June 29, where over half a century’s worth of Hong Kong cinematic gems are showcased.

[forcesmash]

Review: Brave

I don't want to get married, I want to stay single and let my hair flow in the wind as I ride through the glen firing arrows into the sunset

The legendary Pixar team who brought us Toy Story, The Incredibles, Wall-E and Up create their own independant princess who embarks on a journey of self-discovery and growth in their 13th feature film. Merida, a princess of Scotland is decided to be married to a suitor picked out for her, but feels like she has much more life to live before then and attempts to changer her fate. In doing so, she sets off a chain of events that not only threatens her fate, but her entire families lives and those of her kingdom. In some ways Brave is a step forward for the studio after a shallow outing with Cars 2, but maybe a step backward in the overall scheme of original storytelling for the studio.

Lets start with the good. This is a beautiful film (and what Pixar film isn't) that is vibrant in color and depth. Everything about the design is perfect and the realism is the best work we have seen to date, Merida's hair in particular is incredibly executed. The running time is short, but serves the story well as we are spared from dull filler material or scenes that hinder the flow of the story. In an twist of conventional princess storytelling, Marida (voiced by the fantastic Kelley Macdonald) deals with rebellion not against her father but against her mothers expectations. This opens up the story for some interesting character dynamics that has a fairly emotional payoff as the bratty princess tearfully repents "I'm sorry I was so selfish". You never heard Ariel or Pochahontas admit to those faults, but Brave offers a stronger character who, despite her immaturity, may just have grown up before our eyes.

Any complaints about the film are merely the realization of missed opportunities. As mentioned, the mother and daughter conflict is fantastic, but the evolution of this journey is predictable and leaves us wanting more. Other story elements seem more like ideas pitched at the beginning of pre-production rather than fully realized paths, possibly a result of the previous director Brenda Chapman being let go 18 months from release. Chapman, who was heavily involved in many Disney films like The Lion King and Beauty and the Beast presents the traditional Disney template that some will embrace and others will resist becuase this is Pixar, and Pixar forges its own path. It's a trivial observation, but it explains many of the decisions made in the story and song department that often feel all too familiar.

Summary: Despite some surprisingly undeveloped elements in the story, Brave is a lighthearted adventure that has dazzling visuals and a touching story with a positive message highlighting mother and daughter relationships. Its a high recommend for the family.

8 out of 10

Reviewed by Dposadny (follow on twitter @dposadny)

[forcesmash]

"The Citizen Kane of stripper movies"

EW.com on Magic Mike

[forcesmash]

Review : Abraham Lincoln - Vampire Hunter

I have not read the Seth Grahame-Smith penned "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter", but maybe I should throw it on my Kindle and take the weekend to run through it. I have breezed over his previous work "Pride Prejudice and Zombies" and found it to be creative, although not incredibly inspired. Here Smith takes one of our most remembered Presidents and tells a story of how his life was shaped by tragedy, revenge and vampires.

I would call Vampire Hunter "mindless and forgettable fun", but it isn't the usual compliment. To be sure the film is incredibly stylish, the action is engaging and the vampires truly are frightening. These are all great credits to the film and what prevents it from entering Jonah Hex territory. At the end of the day the vampires and action are what you leave the film remembering, and if that is the intention of the film makers then they succeeded admirably.

But what about the story? It's fine if you can accept the nonsense that the driving force behind Abraham Lincoln practicing Law, running for President and starting the Civil War was directly related to his personal vendetta against Vampires and their agenda. Its fine if you can buy that the massacre of Gettysburg was directly related to Vampire involvement and that history was changed by a dispute of territory with the undead (sadly, many younger children watching this movie might just think this). For those who are intelligent, its easy to approach this as simple monster fiction and leave the logic in all this behind.

The overall problem with the movie is that it hits all of the story points successfully without heart, without reflection and without weight. The brisk 105 minutes are spent tracking an entire mans life and motives with a 20 minute final train battle, it is too little time to establish a connection and often doesn't feel like it is even trying to do so. I wouldn't wish the movie to be an hour longer to achieve this, but it seems too content with putting the pages to screen in stylish fashion without breathing life into it.

To go back to my earlier point, it is possible the book shines key insight into the motives and mind of Mr. Lincoln that the film doesn't take the time to show. Maybe other characters are given more pages to develop and aren't rushed on and off the screen as the action demands. What we have in this Hollywood adaptation is a perfect example of how not to translate a book to screen: bulletpointing every chapter and gluing action pieces together hoping it will stick.

Summary: The film wins points for its action and frightening vampires, but the handling of the story is so dull and lifeless that's all you will remember. Not worth $10, rent it when it comes to Netflix.  

6 out of 10

Reviewed by Dposadny (follow on twitter @dposadny)

[forcesmash]

Review : Prometheus

"Big things have small beginnings"

Prometheus is everything I had hoped it would be and more. This is science fiction film done right and considering the last truly great film we had in the genre was District 9 three years ago, we are long overdue. Thank god for director Ridley Scott who in addition to directing the first Alien movie knows how to helm a hell of a prequel.

Prometheus is an intense film that wisely doesn't rely on cheap "gotcha" moments but works your nerves from the inside. I witnessed several grown men covering their eyes at my showing, and my wife was out of breathe from suspense by the end. The film knows when to hit these beats, never going over the top and if the gore doesn't unsettle you then maybe the ideas will. Prometheus has more on its mind than your average Summer blockbuster, and while that may throw some people off I found it to be one of my favorite variations in this classic mythology.

"How far would you go to get your answers? What would you be willing to do?"

Prometheus raises many fascinating questions: why are we here? who made us? what would you say to your creator if you were face to face? The writers wisely avoid long sequences giving real answers, and why should they? I doubt many of the people who complain the film doesn't answer its own questions (plot holes is the common phrasing) would be thrilled if they chose to explain it. These same people would challenge the validity of the conclusions, so why not give us something to think about and ponder? Considering the central theme of the film is belief and faith, providing all the answers to the universe in one trip would undermine these very principles. There are some things just too big for us to handle.

Some seek truth beyond what they are meant to comprehend and that is the ambition and downfall of some characters. The crew regards these giants as God, yet the question is offered "if they created us, who created them?" Sometimes questions only lead to more questions, and when several of the crew members are face-to face with their "creators" each has many questions that reflect their own selfish ambitions with only Shaw asking the right one: "Why do you hate us?"

I have to give this film a high recommend. Not only is it more thought-provoking than I anticipated but the acting and action are both intense and glorious. The special effects blend in seamlessly as the film makers opted for a mixture of CGI and (*gasp*) actual human-built sets! Instead of a world created entirely by green screen, we are pulled into actual environments, and this does wonders for a movie that relies on us feeling like the crew is stranded alone. Despite some pacing inconsistencies Prometheus is a great a return to a franchise that I love, and is my favorite film of the summer so far.

10 out of 10

NOTE: I rarely recommend seeing films in 3-D but if you have an IMAX 3-D theater in your area I highly recommend choosing to see the film in that format.

Reviewed by Dposadny (follow on twitter @dposadny)

[forcesmash]

Welcome to ForceSmash

A site that celebrates Film, Television and Games along with original talent and discussion . . . thanks for joining us!

If you wish to contact the ForceSmash team for questions or to inquire about joining our writing staff please forward all concerns to [email protected]

[forcesmash]

Review: MIB 3

When the original Men in Black was released 15 years ago (yikes!) it presented a fascinating theory that Aliens not only existed, but were living among us in elaborate disguises. The Men in Black were the human representatives tasked with keeping the peace and making sure the human race was unaware of their existence, that and saving the world occasionally. It was a conspiracy theiroists wet dream and an upbeat sci-fi ride that was a box office success and a cultural hit (Here Come the Men in Black dance anyone?). 5 years later MIB 2 tried to follow the same formula (with less success) and added bigger guns and wilder twists. I didn't hate it, but it wasn't as fresh and certainly not as clever.

The story has J going back in time to save K's life from Boris "the Animal" (played by Jemaine Clement). Boris is probably the best villain in the trilogy as his motives are simple: revenge. He has no world domination aspirations or elaborate plan, he simply wants to kill K.

Going back in time could have been an interesting concept in the first film, but the plot point is becoming a tired formula in cinema over the last decade and this film adds nothing to the device. It is however wildly entertaining to see Josh Brolin as a young Tommy Lee Jones who proves to be an inspired casting choice.

Despite a good trip down memory lane the film stumbles in trying to be safe and ultimately loses itself in its convoluted setup. We get no real risks in the mythology and virtually no conspiracy mysteries related to our world. Where is the scene where we find out the Lincoln Memorial is the resting place for an alien artifact? The most we get is an update of pop-culture aliens (does putting Gaga on the list shock anyone?). Because it abandons expanding the universe for the time travel option, much of the middle act becomes a complete bore: Smith really isn't funny, the action is stale and we care little about many of the new characters introduced.

Ultimately the pacing rebounds at the end with an entertaining action sequence set during the Apollo 11 launch. From there on out the film is golden, providing solid entertainment and an incredibly touching revelation about our two main characters.

I'll be content if this is the last we see of the Men in Black. I has been fun but the series has said all it is going to say. I feel this film could have been worse than it was, but with a compelling villain and a solid ending its worth a look.

6 out of 10

[forcesmash]

Review: The Dictator

The first thing we see at the beginning of Sasha Baron Coen's The Dictator is a photo of Kim Jong Il with the words "In Loving Memory of Kim Jong-Il". I laughed for 5 minutes at that joke. Welcome to the world of Supreme Ruler Aladeen: a man who enjoys cutting off Mii heads with his Wii remote and wants a death rocket built with a pointy nose to destroy everyone.

To be sure, there are plenty of racy jokes at play, many who suffer from trying to go too far without being terribly clever. I found myself going 15 minutes at a time without a laugh. But when I laughed, I laughed long and hard. Some of the jokes are setup in brilliant sequences and some of the laughs come from poking fun at the power and beliefs of dictators themselves (When his wife tells him that she is pregnant, Aladeen joyfully holds her belly "are you having a boy or an abortion?" he glees).

I left The Dictator with fond memories of some great comedic moments, but the movie felt somewhat forgettable as it suffered from poor structure and an obligation to be offensive. That being said, I'd see this over Bruno any day of the week.

6 out of 10