#grade b-

[superbeans89]

What I read:

What I saw:

[critiqueswithmoxy]

Movie: Mystic Pizza

Enjoyed this movie. Well written, authentic acting, it treated the audience like they are smart. Captured the 80s really well. Loads of people I could root for, and overall heartwarming.

Some problematic issues, which were a product of the time. A much older man and a 17 year old babysitter had a relationship/situationship. There was a female pressuring a male for sex, crossing boundaries and disrespecting her partner. Loads of offensive 80s terminology, and if you lived through it will probably feel nostalgic. Underage drinking.

Themes: female centered story, growing up, navigating romantic relationships, being yourself (indirectly), family and chosen family, class differences (poor vs rich), romance

Grade: B- (Nostalgia might have made this higher.)

[thatonereviewblog]

TV Review- House of Cards 1x05: "Chapter 5"

Note: Spoilers through Episode 1.05.

This episode most prominently made me consider the question: Why do I care?  What does it matter if Frank is able to throw the gala for Claire or that Zoe is trying to be “successful”?  What makes us care about television anyway, so much that it has more impact on us than any number of documentaries or journalistic articles?  It’s the fact that the people on the screen remind us of ourselves in some way, even the sociopaths like Tony Soprano that have more money than we could ever imagine.  But think about Frank Underwood.  Do you see yourself in him?  I mean, part of me does.  There’s a sick part in myself (and in all of you) that wants to twist the weak to satisfy our whims, turning them into gladiators for our amusement.  But the characters on this show aren’t enough like us.  They’re shells with one or two human facets to draw us in, but when we step close enough to them, we realize that they’re ultimately fake.  And that’s one of House of Cards’s biggest faults, one that takes center stage this episode.  “Chapter 5”, while decent television, suffers because it didn’t draw me in enough to really care about much of what was going on.

The episode structure of House of Cards is one of its primary problems, as it tries to do something that only works with a couple shows (The Wire does it best): It tries to be a novel.  The issue is that, in doing so, it forgets what differentiates television from written texts.  Take a show like Mad Men, for example, a show where Matthew Weiner (the creator) SPECIFICALLY said that each season is its own entity, telling its own story.  It’s a show where the parts add up to the whole, and you know what, the whole usually ends up amazing.  Why?  Well, each part is a behemoth in and of itself, its own entity, with heaps and loads of meaning and thematic depth specific to the episode.  Game of Thrones, while being less dense, still segments its seasons, where each episode is its own entity.  That’s the problem with House of Cards.  What does “Chapter 5” matter, in comparison to “Chapter 4” or “Chapter 3”?  It tells a story, but there isn’t enough there to separate it from other episodes.  And that ultimately detracts from the specific chapters as well as the whole, since we’re only getting a single long journey through a season instead of thirteen smaller yet satisfying journeys equaling one massive journey.

So, this episode has us navigating a new relationship: Zoe and Frank.  Frank’s trying to use her (for information, presumably), and Zoe is happy to oblige in order to get stories for her new job at Slugline.  Her success can be almost solely attributed to Frank, something that we (the audience) know could undo her if Frank decides to unravel her.  The story has set the stage so that Zoe isn’t only too naïve to understand that Frank’s grip is potentially fatal, but that she’s also too ambitious to realize how delusional she is.  It’s a fine setup for disaster, one that a better show could do a lot more with.  The problem with it is that we don’t know anything about Zoe.  There’s no reason to care whether or not she’s undone because we don’t know who she is.  The Frank/Claire relationship is a little better since it has been in the spotlight for a little longer, but it’s still kind of hollow.  We see how businesslike their relationship is, as Frank is completely honest about sleeping with Zoe, something that Claire is (kind of) okay with because it’s part of Frank’s way of staying alive in the political realm.  Of course, she’s not completely okay with it, as they’re still in a romantic relationship and Zoe is both younger and more attractive than she is.  She’s so preoccupied by death that seeing Frank sleep with somebody younger and more attractive seems to make her obsolete.  She’s just a woman to pose with on campaign posters.  And that would make anybody unhappy.  But, then again, her relationship with Frank is still kept at arm’s length, vague and somewhat unexplained.  And, while the show is only five hours in, that’s more than long enough to paint a vivid portrait of what this marriage is really like.  So far, the relationships in this show aren’t that great, even the Frank/Claire relationship, which isn’t all that bad.

One of the ideas that the show desperately tries to convey is how Frank’s poisonous touch infects all that he comes across, and, to an extent, it does a relatively decent job conveying it.  Of course, it has a hard time differentiating whether the realm of politics or Frank himself does this, but it still nevertheless shows how Frank (who is poisonous either way) ends up damaging all he sees.  Take, for example, Claire’s gala and how it is affected by Frank’s dispute with the teachers’ union (and more specifically, Marty Spinelli).  She’s potentially out of the $500,000 that the gala would have gotten her because Spinelli decided to get the hotel to cancel on her, making her collateral damage in Frank and Marty’s feud.  Of course, Frank is able to maneuver around Spinelli, as he’s done with everybody else in every episode up to now, but it doesn’t stop his actions from inevitably having effects.  Frank’s poisonous rot may spread through all around him, but he can contain it when he needs to, at least for now.  But, when he doesn’t contain the damage, it’s far more severe.  His effect on Peter is tremendous, as is his potential effect on Zoe, as he’s gained so much power over her that he could potentially discard her at any moment.  As for the plot itself, the real issue with Frank and Marty’s feud comes from Frank always winning (ALWAYS) and Marty being such a half-retarded caricature that we know that there’s no way that he can win.  There’s no tension in that plot at all.  So, if we know the outcome already, then why should we care?  I don’t know.  It certainly makes for boring television.

But the greatest mine for compelling drama is undoubtedly Peter Russo, who sinks further into depression following his role in the closing of the shipyard.  While I thought the scene where his constituents were bitching him out for hanging them out to dry was one-dimensional and moronic (as it involved a lot of backstory that was vague and shitty), I absolutely loved the scene where he attempts to answer emails from those constituents.  There’s one specific email that he tries to answer, saying that he’s a good man, but can’t explain why he let the shipyard close.  He just starts the sentence with “The reason…” without finishing it.  Peter doesn’t have any reason to be in politics.  His girlfriend is gone.  He has no friends in politics.  He’s not built for the political realm.  There is no reason for him to do anything in politics anymore, other than keeping Frank from destroying his life.  But things do indeed change for him.  Watching him get twisted (again) by Frank, being told that he’s going to run for Governor of Pennsylvania, was actually rather interesting, as it swiftly ended Peter’s depression arc while starting up a new one.  I really like the change in pace, not only because it’s fresh and new, but also because the depression arc (while good) was predictable and this one offers a little more mystery and intrigue.  While I’m not a fan of the overarching plot (what do we know about the President to make him the antagonist?), Frank and Peter’s connection to it is probably its one highlight.

House of Cards is a show that, at its core, is somewhat hollow and empty.  It’s plot with a glossy coat of “grit” and “darkness” and a core that tries to contain substance but ends up being mostly hollow.  Sure, politics change people, and those who don’t change are swept aside by those who have, but that barely scratches the surface of the real problems that lie inside the realm of politics.  If the characters were more interesting, then it would be a lot easier to make this show at least somewhat compelling.  But, for now, it’s just barely holding onto any sort of purpose, at least scratching the surface of something instead of swinging and completely missing.

Also: I can’t help but see Frank and Peter’s relationship as some sort of political equivalent of torture porn.  ALL we ever see of Peter is how completely fucked he is.  While I don’t mind seeing that, I’d like to see something else define him.  Something substantial.

Also also: I will admit, even though I knew Peter would survive, the bit with the razor blade was a tad eerie.

Final Thoughts: Another okay episode of House of Cards, “Chapter 5” moves things forward a bit but still remains somewhat hollow and frustrating.

Grade: B-

Sorry that it took me so long to get this review up.  I’m going to try to be more strict about my House of Cards reviews, but we’ll see how that goes.  As for the other TV shows I’m reviewing, we’ll see Game of Thrones later today, Mad Men tomorrow, the season finale of Archer on Friday, LOST soon, and Season 1 of Veep later this week.  I know; it’s a lot of TV shows.  But I really only have time for TV lately.  However, I’ll work on movies, as Evil Dead just came out and I’m going to try to see it soon.  As for video games, I’m going to try to finish up Mass Effect and God of War 3, though I do want to play through some older games when I have time.  Until tomorrow (or later today), loyal followers.

Previous Review- Archer 4x12: “Sea Tunt: Part I”

Next Review- Game of Thrones 3x02: “Dark Wings, Dark Words”

Remember to check out the website that I contribute to:

http://www.thecriticalreception.com/

[thatonereviewblog]

TV Review- House of Cards 1x04: "Chapter 4"

Note: Spoilers through Episode 1.04.

It’s a huge problem when a show is at its most tedious when it’s focusing on anything related to its central conflict.  If the backbone of the series doesn’t have enough potential within it, then it’ll crumble under the pressure to remain compelling when it really just can’t do it.  Right now, that pressure is on, as the politics side of the episode is mostly impotent, trying to be interesting but falling short of doing so.  The characters and thematic ideas are interesting enough to hold attention, but that’s about all that this episode has going for it.  It’s not good considering how much the season still has to cover, but it’s managing to stay above water for the time being.

The series tries to juggle quite a bit per episode, with this particular episode having four different plotlines.  The biggest of the four is Frank’s, which honestly was the worst of them all.  This particular episode has Frank shaking up the leadership in Congress, orchestrating a coup of the House Majority leader David Rasmussen.  It trudges on with the same joylessness that “Chapter 2” had, with Frank moving step by step through his plan without hitting any real snags or encountering any sort of setback or blowback of any kind.  Not to mention how every other politician in this show seems to be so much dumber than Frank.  That entire story was immensely stagnant, probably the worst of the series so far, as there were no highs, no lows, no shift in dramatic tension, really nothing at all to give it life.  Well…it does one thing.  It just reiterates the fact that Frank is, well, a pretty big asshole.  Of all of the characters to root for, Frank ranks pretty damn low, down there with the likes of Zoe.  Sometimes I think that the problem with the show isn’t that it doesn’t have good ideas; it’s that we’re seeing too much of one of its worse ideas.  Frank just isn’t compelling yet.  In fact, he’s the least compelling lead on the show right now.  At the very least, I could give you a sentence or two saying what makes Claire, Zoe, or Peter tick, but I don’t really have anything for Frank.  Vengeance?  Anger?  Numbness after politics ripped the morality from his heart?  I don’t know.  It could be any or none of those things.  But if we don’t get any sort of insight soon (other than his ties to death), then these storylines are just going to keep getting worse.

The episode shines a little more when it comes to the major themes explored, the biggest being the price of dealing in politics and the moral compromise that comes with that deal.  Claire and Peter are the ones to directly feel the pain of that price, as Claire has to turn down a great deal of money to avoid taking part in politics that could hurt her and Frank, instead having to rely directly on Frank for help; Peter has to fuck over his home district to keep Frank happy.  Both are adequately built up, as we see the cost of both of their inactivity, both tangible and emotional.  Claire isn’t able to fund new projects in Africa and Peter has to watch 12,000 jobs close. They both still live by a moral code, which is a weakness within the political realm, a place saturated by predators and death.  They’re both unwilling to adapt themselves to the immoral ways of the political realm (keep in mind that I’m talking about House of Cards’s interpretation of the “political realm”, not reality), and because of that they have to compromise in order to stay alive within that realm.  But why compromise when it does so much harm?  Well, people don’t want to be forced to shift around their entire identity to compensate for a couple threatened beliefs.  They’d rather have their beliefs and that identity while simply feeling the pain of having the two of them clash.  Of course, that clash will eventually consume a person whole, but it saves them from immediate collapse.  The way that the major themes of the episode flow through Peter and Claire is probably the episode’s greatest strength.

But there are a lot of issues within the characters, whether that be based on this episode or the series as a whole.  One major issue I have with the characterization in this show is how different “Chapter 2” Claire was from the Claire we see now.  The Claire in “Chapter 2” was just a cold-hearted bitch, uncaring about watching those around her leave.  Now, we’re faced with a woman who really does want to help those around her, who actually cares about her non-profit organization because she wants to do good.  There’s a HUGE disparity between these two portrayals, and it’s infuriating because those two portrayals are completely incompatible.  This new Claire is much better, but I still can’t shake what they were going for back in “Chapter 2” and how badly they fucked it up.

Still, there’s a major difference between Claire/Peter and Frank/Zoe, and that’s the moral standards that they possess.  It didn’t really come as a huge surprise to me that Frank would sleep with Zoe, simply because House of Cards seemed like the kind of show that would go there.  But that’s just my expectations for the show talking.  However, when it comes to Frank’s characterization, he didn’t seem like the kind of guy who would sleep around.  We get quite a few scenes where Frank and Claire have some genuine connection, and even though I could see how Frank could be frustrated by Claire’s inability to really connect on a romantic level with him, this scene between Frank and Zoe happened after a nice romantic scene between him and Claire.  It didn’t seem like a character revelation, instead seeming like another opportunity to prove that Frank is indeed an asshole.  Ultimately, the decision to have Frank and Zoe sleep together feels forced at best.  It seems like the show doesn’t really have a handle on its characters, and that’s a HUGE problem in a show that already has a lot of them.

This show isn’t really improving.  It does have some great ideas that it follows through on, concepts like the pervasive nature of death (emotional death, moral death) in politics and the way that political involvement becomes part of a person’s identity and doesn’t really let go.  I like how they’re using those ideas to create some scintillating dialogue.  However, the basic components behind those themes just don’t hold up.  The plot is shaky at best, not really compelling or interesting.  And the characters, while intriguing, aren’t much more than that.  The writers simply don’t have a handle on them, and it shows.  It would be nice to see the show improve, but as of right now, it keeps making habitual mistakes and shows no signs of correcting itself.

Also: I probably should have been harder on “Chapter 2”, considering how it completely missed how Claire’s character has been moving forward and has badly colored her storylines up to now.

Also also: What the fuck was with that line about not dieting because of the “great pizza” from Pizza Hut?  Not only was that shameless product placement, Pizza Hut isn’t even that great.

Final Thoughts: “Chapter 4” is an episode that mostly does well when it comes to themes and characters, but is incredibly boring when it comes to the political arena.

Grade: B-

Sorry that I’ve been slacking on reviews.  School is really getting to me these days.  However, today I will begin my Season 2 reviews of GAME OF THRONES!  It’ll be a lot of fun to go back through this incredibly violent season and see how it fares against the first one.  I’ll also be reviewing the same shows as always, with Archer today (hopefully), The Walking Dead on Monday, and the SEASON FINALE of Girls also on Monday.  There will certainly be more games to come, as well as movies, so I’ll keep you all informed on that.  Get excited for new TV shows and games, everybody.  Gonna be awesome.  Until tomorrow, loyal followers.

Previous Review- Aliens: Colonial Marines

Next Review- Game of Thrones 2x01: “The North Remembers”

Remember to check out the website that I contribute to:

http://www.thecriticalreception.com/

[thatonereviewblog]

TV Review- Archer 4.02: "The Wind Cries Mary"

Note: Spoilers through Episode 4.02.

The best Archer episodes seamlessly incorporate all of the characters in the central storyline, doing so in a way where each one is given room to breathe on their own (such as “Lo Scandalo” from Season 3).  Or, on the other hand, they diminish the focus to only a character or two, such as Lana and Archer on a rampage in “Placebo Effect” in Season 2.  It’s when the show tries to mix the two styles that there’s trouble.  This particular episode, “The Wind Cries Mary”, has a lot of issues because of that mixture, but still ends up producing some great laughs and ending on a very strong note.

Most comedy episodes, since they’re more singular, self-contained entries in a larger, overarching season, operate by taking their ensemble casts and splitting them into different plotlines, each of varying importance.  For example, this particular episode of Archer had the A-plot as Archer trying to find and help out his old friend Luke, an agent working for ODIN who has been accused to stealing uranium, murdering his fellow agents, and burning to death in a plane crash.  While it doesn’t play out flawlessly, it does one of the things Archer does best, which is setting up mystery elements at the beginning of the episode and revealing them by the end.  Those mystery elements center around whether or not Luke really did steal the uranium, murder those agents, and fake his own death, as well as whether he’s a homosexual or not.  It can be tough to center a story around a topic as volatile as homosexuality, because, as we all know, it’s easy to come across as prejudiced.  For the most part, the show plays it safe and uses the time-old “super-straight man nervous that he’s gay” trope, having Archer deny that Luke is gay because he’s scared of being gay himself.  What makes that old trope funny in this case is that everybody else is certain that Luke is gay and, lo and behold, he is.  It’s just a shame they decided to play it so safe with the homosexual jokes, especially because this show has always been so fucked up and offensive.

Archer can sometimes pull off its B-plots (such as the drug testing plot in "El Contador"), but this one just didn’t seem to land.  The “peer review” plotline felt poorly integrated not only because it wasn’t developed enough to land a lot of laughs, but also because it played out mostly through dialogue during scenes that were pushing the A-plot forward.  What went wrong with this particular B-plot was that it tried to integrate itself into the A-plot and failed instead of completely isolating itself and growing into its own fully-developed comedic entity.  If you asked me what Ray, Pam, Cheryl, Mallory, and Krieger did this episode, I’m not sure I could tell you.  They just kind of hung out at ISIS and, every now and then, Pam would say something about peer reviews.  This is a minor structural issue, something that doesn’t worry me when it comes to future episodes, but it’s still frustrating in this episode.

However, there were still some great laughs, most of them playing off of character dynamics and personality traits that have been established for seasons and have always been ridiculously funny.  Archer’s references to Predator (and him briefly scanning the trees) as well as the Entmoot from Lord of the Rings (maybe he’s gay for Tolkien!) had me on the floor.  And the ending, probably the funniest bit of the episode, is brilliant.  I’m a sucker for the “zoom out to background scenery followed by a horrified scream”, and Archer screaming because Luke confessed that he violated him when he was passed out way-back-when was pretty damn good (Lana’s facial expression topped that particular joke off).  Sure, the “back at ISIS” plotline was completely forgettable, but that didn’t mean the dialogue was bad.  The lackluster nature of the plot just brought the rest of it down.  Overall, the dialogue was as impeccable as it usually is in an Archer episode, mostly because of the characters’ already-established personalities.

This season of Archer is looking like it’s going to replicate the quality that we’ve seen thus far, despite my somewhat negative opinion of this episode.  While neither of these first couple episodes has made me laugh like “Space Race” or “Pipeline Fever”, I chalk that up to technical imperfections like plotting and the use of their characters within those plots.  The magic is still there; the characters are still given excellent dialogue that makes the most of the traits that have been established for them so far, and because of that, there are still some excellent laughs.  I’ve got a good feeling about this season; considering how witty and fun it’s been so far, it’s got a lot of potential to grow.

Final Thoughts: A decent episode of Archer that fails to impress with the “peer review” plotline but stays strong with a good main storyline and a fun guest appearance by Timothy Olyphant.

Grade: B-

So I’ll be starting The Walking Dead again tomorrow, which is exciting, because I’ve watched the first couple episodes of Season 3 and have been thoroughly impressed.  As for other shows, I’ll be putting out a Girls review on Monday and more Archer reviews every Friday.  I’ve got some movies that I’d particularly like to review, but I don’t know when I’ll be able to watch them.  I’d watch some today, but I’m fairly ill and I might sleep most of the day away.  Sucks, I know.  And I’m about halfway through Hitman: Absolution, which is nice.  Hopefully, that doesn’t take too long.  We’ll see.  Until tomorrow, loyal followers.

Previous Review- The Walking Dead 2x13: “Beside the Dying Fire”

Next Review- The Walking Dead 3x01: “Seed”

Remember to check out the website that I contribute to:

http://www.thecriticalreception.com/

[thatonereviewblog]

Video Game Review- Darksiders

Note: Spoilers about demons, angels, and protagonists that look like refrigerators.

More video game reviews!  This one will be about a game that came out just a couple years ago and has a sequel that just came out last week: Darksiders.  The strange, yet interesting, yet fun cross between The Legend of Zelda and God of War.  While it takes some of the best elements from each of those game series and merges it into its own fun take on those games, it misses out on the rest of those best elements and ultimately fails to grip us like those games did.

The characters don’t do a great job keeping people interacting with the plot because they’re so bland and uninteresting.  The plot isn’t much to speak of in the first place, as War’s only goal is to murder everything in his path in order to kill The Destroyer (Kratos murdering everything in his path in order to kill Ares…).  Sure, War is the typical badass (gruff voice, built like a refrigerator box), and he works in that character role, but he isn’t more than that.  The side characters aren’t memorable at all, just vehicles to push the story forward, nothing more.  What pushes the game forward is the puzzle system and how more areas are unlocked by obtaining more tools and weapons.  War is given tools like a boomerang to hit ranged targets and a grappling hook to swing over large gaps.  The similarities to Zelda are uncanny, stretching from the specific dungeons to the horse, Ruin.  Sometimes it feels like there’s so much of Zelda in this game that it’s not original enough, and that’s true to an extent, but it still makes this game incredibly enjoyable to play.

There’s also a TON of resemblance to God of War.  War gathers experience souls through combat and treasure chests, as well as green souls that replenish his health and yellow souls that replenish his Chaos meter (special attacks).  Those experience souls can be used to purchase powers and moves for combat, the same way that Kratos improves his character through using experience orbs.  War can also increase his maximum health and Chaos through finding items in the game.  His personality is even close to Kratos’s, rough, emotionless and hell-bent on vengeance.  Again, it resembles God of War a bit too closely, but still takes the best elements from God of War and integrates it into the gameplay.

The battle system is a lot of fun, even if the secondary two weapons are almost completely useless as weapons.  By the time the scythe and fist weapons are obtained, the Chaoseater sword is already vastly superior.  Another reason that the Chaoseater is superior to the rest of the weapons is that the other two weapons are clunky and weak.  There’s not a great deal of variation among combat movements, but there’s more than enough with the Chaoseater to make War fluid and exciting in combat.  The scythe and fist weapons have far fewer combat movements to choose from and those few movements are slow and almost identical to the sword’s movements.  The enemy variation is also adequate, even though enemies later in the game are basically stronger versions of earlier enemies.  Still, their speed, size, and ferocity are varied enough to require far different tactics on each one, keeping things fresh and interesting.  The bosses resemble Zelda in that they each require different tactics to conquer, each one being fairly simple to figure out.  The bosses are a great deal of fun, all far bigger than the rest of the enemies, their defeat bringing about a great sense of accomplishment.

The graphics are somewhat cartoonish in their design, but work great in crafting the environment that War inhabits.  The post-apocalyptic landscape, coupled with the mythological allusions to heaven and hell, is crafted beautifully and is truly one of the strong points of this game.  Each section of the game, while feeling similar in how dark and downtrodden it is, has some new and unique life breathed into it.  The game does a great game combining the cartoonish design with the fantastical landscapes to create an environment that truly feels worthy of adventure.

A couple specific gripes: The end game collection quest for the Armageddon Pieces (Artifacts of Chozo in Metroid Prime…) was a little tedious, kind of an anticlimactic transition between the EPIC Black Throne and the AWESOME final boss battle.  And the transition sequences between the Serpent Holes was also tedious.  One of Darksiders’s weaknesses is its inability to sustain the epic sensation that comes from dungeons like The Black Throne and Twilight Cathedral.

Thumbs up: I LOVED the dungeon design and how the puzzle sequences were fastened together to create the Zelda dungeon experience.  It was a lot of fun, especially because the dungeons were just difficult enough to require thought, but also easy enough to make the game relaxing.

So, Darksiders is a fun game that runs approximately 15 hours, a hell of an adventure but mostly bland outside of the adventuring.  Maybe a little more innovation and some better integration of past ideas would have benefited an already interesting idea.

Final Thoughts: While the plot and characters are rather weak, the battle and exploration systems are fun and take the best elements from Zelda and God of War.  Worth renting.

Grade: B-

Finally finished up this review.  I’ll probably be reviewing a couple movies over the week, as well as some OZ and Breaking Bad.  And as for future video games, well, I’ll probably revisit the adventures of Nathan Drake.  Until tomorrow, loyal followers.

[thatonereviewblog]

Movie Review- 21 Jump Street

Note: Spoilers ahead.

I hadn’t heard much of this movie before I gave it a shot, except that some of my friends liked it.  I can tell why; it fits neatly into the genre of modern raunchy R-rated action comedies that today’s youth love so very much.  I admit, it appeals to me in some respects.  Some of the jokes are hilarious in how witty they are and sometimes the action is a lot of fun.  But, sometimes the humor in these movies and the attention to action over substance makes the movie kind of frustrating to take in.

The plot of the movie is pretty basic and doesn’t allow for very much innovation.  There’s only a small amount of deviation from any sort of standard Hollywood plot to set it apart from the rest.  Schmidt was the loser in high school and Jenko was the popular kid.  Now that they’re cops and they have to go undercover in a high school to bring down a drug ring, their roles are reversed.  That’s the most interesting part of the movie, watching Schmidt navigate the popular world while Jenko navigates the world of the geeky outcasts.  While it was cool to watch the roles get reversed, the awkward way that both of them navigated their roles were pretty standard when it comes to Hollywood comedies.  They were put in situations where they didn’t know what to do (Schmidt in drama class, Jenko in AP Chemistry) and they acted weird when they tried to figure out what to do.  The redeeming factor to its standard nature is in its humor.  While it was standard to watch them navigate high school all over again, it was also hilarious.

As for the rest of the plot, it’s unbelievably predictable and derivative of the basic formula for action-comedies.  You can tell as soon as they re-enter high school that they’ll come into conflict with each other, and not only that, but that Jenko will become jealous of Schmidt.  It takes away from the entertainment quality of the movie because it becomes so predictable that there’s no way to be excited for what happens next.  The only excitement comes from asking what’s going to happen next in the plot, which sucks given the potential of the characters’ respective stories.  But it’s much easier to just write standard Hollywood shit that will surely rake in money than think outside of the box and maybe come up with something funny AND compelling.

The good: Most of the humor in this movie was pretty funny, its best coming from both emotional extremes.  Schmidt’s deadpan delivery to a lot of his jokes was great, albeit a little repetitive, but I loved it every time.  The movie was also hilarious when specific characters were acting in an extreme manner.  The section of the movie where Schmidt and Jenko were on drugs in class was hilarious, especially when Jenko was playing the instruments in band class.  However, the humor got a little mindless when the situations were somewhat absurd.  At the end of the movie, when Mr. Walter’s penis got shot off and he picked it up with his mouth, it was just gross and nonsensical.  Same with the car chase.  The humor and action became too nonsensical to be taken remotely seriously.  But other than those few moments, it was a hilarious movie.

The characters were varied enough to work within the confines of the movie, but most of them were either one-dimensional or simplistic in their complexity.  Schmidt and Jenko were the most interesting characters in the movie, and they weren’t even that complex.  They were initially defined as the geek and the popular kid only to How do two kids that dislike each other come to be friends?  Well, we get a quick two minute montage where they help each other through the academy that’s supposed to throw a loose, quick answer our way.  Their characters simply aren’t developed enough through that segment.  It passed by way too quickly to have any real effect.  And it wasn’t even entirely necessary.  The movie could have gotten away with a different narrative method that worked better for the pacing.  But anyway, Schmidt and Jenko, over the course of the movie, become more compassionate, more accepting of each other and the clique in high school that oppressed them.  That’s great character development…if it wasn’t so painfully obvious that it’s going to happen.  As for the rest of the characters, they’re all fairly one dimensional.  Ice Cube is Schmidt and Jenko’s angry superior, Molly is Schmidt’s love interest, and Mr. Walters is the goofy asshole teacher (who ends up being the typical mwahaha-ing antagonist).  Nothing special.

It was fun to see people from the original 21 Jump Street making a cameo appearance in the movie, even if the movie doesn’t mirror the show in any real capacity other than its basic setup.  Johnny Depp was just another name in the long list of big names in this movie.  That was one reason I was kind of surprised at the somewhat mediocre quality of the movie.  There were so many huge names to improve the movie with their performances.  Also, Nick Offerman is always the shit with his deadpan performances and his beard.

I’m a fan of action-comedies.  They’re fun and entertaining and, hopefully, interesting and innovative.  Ultimately, 21 Jump Street is only fun and entertaining.  While that’s great for kicking back, hanging out with friends, and scarfing down beer and popcorn, it doesn’t mean that it’s a great movie.

Also: The funniest part of the movie was definitely when Schmidt and Jenko were talking to Mr. Walter high.  Their hallucinations were so bizarre and messed up.  I loved it.

Final Thoughts: While a funny movie, 21 Jump Street is your standard raunchy R-rated action-comedy with more laughs than brains.

Grade: B-

I’m working on more Breaking Bad reviews, as well as movie reviews like Spider Man and Nolan’s Batman.  I’m also going to see a movie today with my girlfriend, so we’ll see how good that one is.  And yes, I know I won’t be able to finish the remaining 33 Breaking Bad episodes in 5 days, but I’ll get them (and part 1 of Season 5) done before the final 8 episodes are aired in summer 2013 or whenever the hell those fuckers at AMC decide to let Vince Gilligan film and release them.  Until tomorrow, loyal followers.