Forrestgump1

When the self proclaimed Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson graces the silver screen. in Brett Ratner's adaption of the Steve Moore comic, showcasing the titular character that is Hercules. I almost believed every second. Perhaps if not for the overly dramatic battle sequences, cornballish one liners, and some CGI heavy effects that could use some work. That being said, if not for Johnson and Ratner, we probably would be looking at a far worse version of the Kellan Lutz driven vehicle that opened back in January. Johnson is the lion-sheep head wearing mercenary in full forced-a hired gun, but also a tabloid of the gods. The answer is that is he human? or god? He travels in style with the realm of a C.S Lewis novel at his side. (Yes, this was a reference to Narnia). Lured by riches, and seeking revenge for the unspecified death of his family. At the film's best it reminded me of Zack Snyder's 300, while of course THIS film is rated PG13, so the blood spewing will be put to a minimum and Johnson who has brought life to many franchises including; "GI Joe" and "Fast and Furious". Is right in the typical macho wheelhouse he is normally accustomed too. When the big ferocious muscle induced hero is fighting the bad guys it all feels right. Brett Ratner (Rush Hour films) knows how to shoot some inept stylized action sequences, which I was engulfed entirely. However after the second battle (Which clocks in at about ten minutes) I was feeling a little fatigued. Then, when the somewhat predictable finale the film follows--they expect the audience to be shocked as if we didn't see this coming. Most fans will bypass this flaw, I just kind of shrugged my shoulders and accepted it. The best scenes are the one's when Hercules has too ask himself who he is, and what he is there for. You probably saw this in the trailer "I AM HERCULES!!!!!" he shouts to the screen. Somehow during that scene my heart was beating pretty profusely. So, to some extent, the film had an effect on me. The latest adaptation of "Hercules" was much better then it probably could have been (this is not saying much). I can almost guarantee that it will wash the tireless taste out of the forsaken "Legend Of Hercules" out of your mouth. I did actually enjoy the film when it all boils down. Probably because there is just enough plot to inch the film along, and more than enough battle escapades to at least distract me from the much bigger picture, which is probably a horrible film. B- By: Nate Adams Directed By: Brett Ratner Rated: PG13 Runtime: 96 mins Studio: Paramount Pictures Release Date: July 25th 2014 Thanks For Stopping By

Going into the latest Disney tent-pole, and the sequel to last summer’s snooze fest (Even by kiddie fare standards), “Planes: Fire & Rescue” I had my fair share of low, and I mean, low expectations. The trailers build this up to be one big sap fest, the first preview had the very good Spencer Lee singing the titular song “Still I Fly”. Which, yes makes it’s way into a slow montage in the film. To be expected, the film is not in the high winds of what it’s animation department is actually capable off. (Have you seen “Frozen?”) . Parents will find the film utterly predictable, but the younger children will more than likely be put in a trance, as soon as Dusty Crophopper swings into the big screen. To say the least I was truly surprised at how much I actually enjoyed this follow up sequel. Having only been less than a year since we saw the last Planes, Dusty is now a big time celebrity, and world champion. However when his gearbox reluctantly fails -- this causes Dusty to find a new calling, as he most likely will never race again. After a terrible accident leaves his hometown in ruins Dusty takes new leave, and begins investing into the world of firefighting. Serving alongside the heroes he aspires to be. You may not believe it at first, but there actually is some touching moments sprinkled throughout “Planes: Fire and Rescue”, not to mention, most of the scenery is gorgeous to look at (a vast improvement over the first outing). The directing staff actually studied for months on the actual depths that these firefighters go through. Which truly is showcased in the very cool air stunt sequences, which are easily the film’s greater strengths. Ideally, what propelled the film even further was the addition of a new band of characters, that are superior to the previous entry. Characters that I actually cared about. Of course, with new characters comes with a new cast..lead by Julie Brown (Modern Family) as Lil’ Dipper. Ed Harris, Wes Studi, Hal Holbrook while Dane Cook returned to voice Dusty. So much went wrong with the first “Planes” that it actually set a low bar for the standards of Disney, and for that I was truly shocked. It has become apparent that this crew saw those faults and drastically altered them. Resulting in a more than passable escapism for the younger **** even slight enjoyment for the adults as well. The film is nowhere near the likes of “LEGO Movie”, “Frozen”, or “How To Train Your Dragon 2”. Running at a smooth 1hr and 15 mins, is just perfect enough to entertain the **** not drag down the parents along the way. Everyone leaves feeling satisfied B By: Nate Adams Directed By: Roberts Gannaway Rated: PG Runtime: 75 mins Studio: Disney Release Date: July 18th Thanks For Stopping By

It had become very apparent to me early on during my viewing of “Sex Tape” that Cameron Diaz, and Jason Siegel were going to have remarkable on screen chemistry. Then the unthinkable happened, the first five minutes ended. Where to begin? is a question that is never asked in the treacherous debacle that is “Sex Tape”. A bland attempt at a lude-and raunchy R rated comedy, that is not only poorly scripted, but severely unfunny in all the wrong ways. The film follows the early sex lives of one Jay (Siegel) and Annie (Diaz), we (the audience) know nothing about the couple at first. just that they love having sex. (As showcased within the films first hefty five minute montage - these scenes alone earned the hard R rating). Fast forward a few years -- and they have a couple kids, and are happily married. Annie is on the verge of the biggest breakthrough of her career (selling her blog to a huge branding company) headed by a ****, crazy, and creepy Rob Lowe. While Jay is a successful songwriter, and musician. Between the jobs and the children sex is hardly ever an option. However, on a brink night to celebrate Annie’s new job. In a last ditch effort to restore some flair and originality into their sex **** couple inadvertently make a three hour long escapade. Thinking all was free and clear, their sex tape accidently leaks into the cloud and becomes available to all their closest friends and family. This results in a wild goose chase to “erase” all the evidence before it’s too late. “Sex Tape” is by far one of the more intriguing premises this year has to offer. I mean ask yourself..”if you made a sex tape?” would you want your mom seeing it? heavens no. So my props go to Jake Kasdan and Jason Siegel for making a cool premise, That is, of course, the extent of my appreciation. From then on the movie wallows in self pity, and never takes off from the standard set. At one point Diaz character says “the quality of writing in porn has really gone down these days”. I immediately thought to myself “and so has this movie” ..this was a whopping twenty minutes into the film, where I knew there was no going back. With most films that start off poorly you keep gesturing to your inner self “it’s going to get better, stick with it” and besides from a fun cameo towards the end of the fIlm (I won’t reveal who) “Sex Tape” is just moronic and plain boring. Picture an hour and forty minute long trailer..except with no humor, no jokes, and not a sensible care in the world. The film co-stars Rob Lowe in his worst **** date. In comparison..when you look at earlier films this year “Blended” for example, was a film that knew its boundaries, and it didn’t try to be better than it was. “Sex Tape” think’s it’s funny, and keeps mustering up the same lame one-liners that just leave you sitting in your seat checking your watch constantly wondering where the film is going. I was not a big fan of Kasdan and companies last film “Bad Teacher” I thought the bawdy humor didn’t mesh well with the plot at hand. I suppose the same goes “Sex Tape” in a sense. Not to mention this film has the most absurd amount of product placement I have ever seen. **** get **** like Apple products. Give me a break!. “Sex Tape” is a film that comes on **** then surprisingly pushes you away. There are some moments where I laughed (preferably the aforementioned cameo). Sloppy characters, and even sloppier jokes (Even by R rated standards). Siegel belting out his lines in a high pitched squeal doesn’t help either. I admire the passion and devotion our two leads have to this film. (Diaz especially) However, as with most films with a intricate premise. “Sex Tape” is the latest addition to take something cool, and make it dull and lifeless. D- By: Nate Adams Directed By: Jake Kasdan Rated: R Runtime: 100 mins Studio: Sony Release Date: July 18th 2014 Thanks For Stopping By

The "Planet of the Ape" series has suffered from it's fair share of ups and downs. Most folks, have bad taste still left over from 2001, when Mark Wahlberg headlined the Ill-fated Tim Burton remake of the same name. I liked it, but this is beside the point. Fox, lost all hope and canned any thoughts of a sequel to that version. Then in 2011, the unthinkable happened. A REBOOT (GASP). Rebooting franchises was starting to become a norm, and Fox deliberately **** what would be a giant hit .. "Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes". Not only was that film so captivating and **** was also extremely groundbreaking in the technological advances. Using motion capture suits and WETA digital to bring the apes to life. Three years later, and here we are. "Dawn of The Planet of the Apes" has hit the silver **** while it's not nearly as captivating the second time around. This sequel still proves a worthy entry into this beloved franchise, offering richer and emotional character development. Something an audience member can appreciate. I don't want to sound **** there is a slight chance that yes, you may go bananas. If you stuck around after the credits during "Rise" then you would know a fluenza was starting to break out. (As a result of the apes escaping) "Dawn" picks up the pieces ten winters after the virus outbreak. The apes (head by Caesar) have colonized and are living life peacefully. That is until the remaining survivors, headed by Malcolm (Jason Clarke) and his girlfriend (Keri Russell) stumble upon them. Hoping to use the apes source of power .. to generate it for the other surviving humans. That is until one Ape.. Kopa, decides to wage war on all of humanity. Say what you will, but the original "ROTPOTA" was pretty top notch in terms of quality. I was shocked just how good it turned out to be. However what makes the film so good? .. very rare does an effects team get all the credit. My hat goes off to the folks at WETA digital and their ever expanding tools of motion capture. They simply make it look easy. But, those motion capture suits are nothing without their performers. Andy Serkis (Caesar) steals inadvertently every scene he is in. The process for how the apes have genetically evolved is something for the record books. The audience can feel the emotional integrity that Serkis infuses into the role. For that alone I feel he deserves an Oscar nomination for Best Actor. On the human side of things, Jason Clarke is a much better James Franco to root for. While Gary Oldman is right in his typical wheelhouse. In addition, the story this time around is entertaining **** lacking in some variety. When you watch this film's predecessor, you sort of grow up with Caesar and watch him evolve, plus the technology of the time was superb. The second time, we have grown accustomed to the confines we are entitled too. Matt Reeves (director of Cloverfield) knows his own boundaries and vastly improves upon them. I just wish there was more personal one on one time with Caesar and maybe understand the pressure he has to face. The writing was not as strong as I thought it needed to be too also. While of course this is just me being nit picky. The film still embarks into some new territory, offering a glum look into the not so distant future. For any **** emotional connection to the character is so important. Don't let anyone walk out of this film saying they were not connected of some sorts to the apes. There was a time when I thought to myself.."wow this is amazing, how are they doing this?". The vast majority of the landscapes are simply jawdropping. I can't commend the visual effects crew enough. With a bolder story, enticing characters and more darker tone. "Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes" has enough action for everyone. It may be a little too darker for younger children. But for older **** message is insightfully endearing. You also don't need to be familiar with the original flick to understand this one. There are few references from "Rise". So if you're worried that you haven't seen the predecessor. Rest assured, you won't be confused. Really though, what it boils down too at the end of the day is one person, and his name is Andy Serkis who carries the film on his shoulders, and reluctantly brings new definition to the world of motion capture. It's something no person, nor reviewer can explain. In this process he puts all humans to **** actual apes everywhere. B+ By: Nate Adams Directed By: Matt Reeves Rated: PG13 Runtime: 130 mins Release Date: July 11th 2014 Studio: Fox Thanks For Stopping By

What if all crime was legal once a year? What would you do? How you would you do it? you can quote "cleanse your soul". Does murdering really solve anything? These were the questions asked in James DeMonaco's engaging (sometimes thrilling) escapade "The Purge" a little film that took the box office by storm. Now, over a year later, it's beginning to feel like "The Purge" is becoming an annual gathering. Cashing in on the low budget .. and hopefully turning this franchise into the next "Saw" or "Paranormal Activity"). While I can say that the angle on the subject matter changes a tad, and the perspective as whole has transpired into something that, hypothetically, could work at some point. The problem with "The Purge: Anarchy" is there is little suspense, too many characters, and dumb cliches that I thought we had outgrown by now. Where the original Purge lacked, "Anarchy" kind of makes up for (and not by much). The problem with the first Purge was that it didn't know how to categorize itself. Rather showing how else the world purges, it instead focused on one families night of survival (and stupidity). After about the half hour mark, the intriguing premise turned into a home invasion thriller reminiscent of such better made films like "The Strangers" and "You're Next". Not to mention the only actual crime that film capitalized on was murder. In "The Purge: Anarchy" we are not caught up in one family's life, but three. Which evidently becomes tiresome after awhile,It should say something that I didn't really care much to even know there names. The film opens with an annual announcement commencing the annual purge, and to thank our founding fathers. We first meet a waitress Eva (Carmen Ejogo) who is desperately trying to make ends meet for her daughter, and sick father. Living in the projects. Next we meet the bitter couple of Shane (Zach Gilford) and Liz (Kiele Sanchez), whom are going through the process of a separation. As fate would have it, there car breaks down on a freeway hours before the purge commences (the trailer presumes the car just dies, however, a gang of thugs wearing crazy porcelain masks.. cuts the gas line). Then lastly we meet the classic father out for revenge, Leo Barns (Frank Grillo) for the death of his son, over a year ago by a drunk driver. You wouldn't ever think these three unlikely groups would ever cross paths in such a huge city, but they do. Leo inadvertently saves Eva and her daughter, and thus become entrapped within the confines of the **** now must struggle to indeed "survive the night". First off, "The Purge: Anarchy" started with promise and I had some decent expectations. It looked as though the film would be more manageable, and open than the previous entry. Mainly because were getting into the city, and we are going to see how others purge. Does this happen? not really. Instead of taking a more character driven perspective, the film lags and settles for the same ole political mumbo-jumbo that we don't care about. Adding in some mindless subplot about an army militia, whose sole purpose is to end the Purge. Hence the name "Anarchy". On the performance side of things, nothing truly stood out to me. The only character, if any, that I actually felt connected with was Leo Barnes aching father figure type role, played here by Frank Grillo. His motives for the purge were actually understandable, plain ole fashion revenge. At least he had some purpose. While others were just relentless, and killed others for no apparent reason. Aside from him, everyone else was just basic or average when it comes to the standards of horror fare. (If you can call this a horror flick). I can respect the direction that James DeMonaco takes the film in, rather focusing on just one purge, it tries to introduce several purge's going on at once. The film's conclusion takes elements that made films like "Hostel" famous. Which is the more exciting aspect that the film has to offer. DeMonaco needs to write stronger characters, a heroine of sorts..that an audience can root for. Instead of introducing us to five people that make us feel nothing. At least with the first Purge, they knew what to do with their characters. There was a certain creepiness that Rhys Wakefield brought to the first purge, playing the smart-ivy league schoolboy with a thirst for killing. . While this time, no character brought chills to my spine. Even the creepy rip-off masks from "Your Next" didn't send a shiver, nor a goosebump. I wanted to be engaged, enticed, and enthralled ...and I got neither. Which is truly sad considering how much effort went into making this film. Which, you could obviously tell the budget was a bit bigger and this shows in the action set pieces, which are very well shot. The film ends with "364 days until the next annual purge" so another sequel is almost a forgone conclusion. Ask anyone that I know, and they will tell you I'm **** for a bad horror/slasher flick. "The Purge: Anarchy" is too messy and can't pick up the pieces from it's interesting and original premise. Instead focusing on the events that actually occur, rather than characters I want to understand and get to know. Perhaps some flashbacks with Leo and his child before he was killed. Maybe if we knew the hardships that Liz and Shane had to go through, we as an audience could somehow relate. But no, we're settled for mindless violence that means nothing. I found enjoyment in the first thirty minutes (roughly). But then much like the original, it takes us away to something much more elusive than it needs to be. I still have hopes for what this franchise can accomplish, because in all honestly the premise is too intriguing. For now, If you're looking for a much better horror tale, stay in and rent "Your Next" or "The Cabin In The Woods". You will be glad you did. D By: Nate Adams Directed By: James DeMonaco Rated: R Release Date: July 18th 2014 Studio: Universal Pictures Runtime: 100 Mins Thanks For Stopping By

The term "Inspired by True Events" has been taken a bit extreme lately. Many fellow horror enthusiasts, such as myself, can agree to this. Films like; "The Conjuring", or "The Quiet Ones" use the term "Inspire" which is very loosely based on something that is somewhat accurate. The latest offender of this term; Scott Derrickson and his fright free flick "Deliver Us From Evil". “Deliver Us From Evil” is a film that is cringeworthy and can give you a spike on the ole richter scale inside your body. However, It won’t keep you up late at night with nightmares if that is what you're wondering. That being said, at the end of the film’s lengthy two hour run-time, I felt the film dragged on to precariously in a sense to be taken seriously. Rather it settles in to smooth rhythm early on, then sells out for cheap scares that will make little girls scream, but anyone else feeling irritated. The film opens with the promise “Inspired by true accounts of NYPD Sergeant Ralph Sarchie” Former altar boy turned, who is prone to a natural radar for danger, and trouble. After a dark night in the Bronx Zoo, Sarchie comes in contact with a possessed IRAQ vet. To which, Sarchie writes off as a lunatic. But once his wife (Olivia Munn) and daughter start hearing voices. This is where Father Mendoza (Ramirez) comes in and tests the boundaries of limitations. The cast itself is top notch, featuring the plentiful-and terrifyingly real performance turned in by Eric Bana as the film chronicles his portrayal of NYPD Sergeant Ralph Sarchie and his accounts of paranormal entities and his journey for the truth. Bana owns the movie and walks with pride. In addition the Community alum, and righteous comedian Joel McHale turns in some dramatic roots as Sarchie’s wise-cracking partner Butler. McHale adds some much needed comedic relief when absolutely necessary. Sadly his charismatic charm, and character development goes nowhere. The real show stealer this time belongs to Edgar Ramirez as Mendoza, a priest with a notorious past that haunts him every day, but can channel his fear and anger through God. While Bana’s Sarchie can’t channel his rage (an ode to his earlier Hulk days?) The two perfectly balance off each other and prove a remarkable friendship that marks the films stronger attributes. Obviously, with the good comes the ...well you know. With a title that distinctly calls itself “Deliver Us From Evil” I expected a little more. Not to mention our director Scott Derrickson, whose previous films include the taunt and edgy “Sinister” and of course a beloved classic “The Exorcism Of Emily Rose”. Nobody could argue he doesn’t know how to firmly grasp eerie backdrops and make you feel uncomfortable driving home late at night. But, the cheap thrills and gimmicks only make me question his credibility more. I wish that Derrickson took a more character approach (much like “Godzilla” did) and make us care more. Ralph Sarchie has a family on screen in the film, but its very rare when the audience actually see’s them. So to me, I just didn’t feel as emotionally connected. The ending is satisfying (especially for a horror film) Which was something I could appreciate, when most horror films (See “Oculus”) leave us high and dry and chomping at the bit. Derrickson screenplay at least left us with answers (probably because its loosely based on a true story). Running close to two hours is a hard **** any movie, let alone a self proclaimed-horror flick. There’s of course the occasional thought “Why is he going in the basement alone?!”, or “don’t go down there idiot!” , the same thoughts that come to mind watching ANY other horror flick. I can’t help but feel that these are the over dramatized sequences the film has to offer. And with a director like Derrickson, (just appointed as director of Marvel’s Doctor Strange) he set a bar for himself that obviously he couldn’t live up to. I don’t wanna give the illusion I didn’t have a good time, because I did. There were moments I could feel the goosebumps linger up my body. There was less of that, then I wanted.. but they all can’t be “The Cabin In The Woods”. The film boasts with authentic performances all around the board, to which I was truly impressed. But, the latter is **** the film had been more character driven, less gory, and more prone to it’s own plot-and shorter, then perhaps I would be writing a different review. Sadly “Deliver Us From Evil” comes exactly as advertised.. and I wish it didn’t. C By: Nate Adams Directed By: Scott Derrickson Rated: R Runtime: 118 mins Studio: Sony (Screen Gems) Release Date: July 2nd 2014 Thanks For Stopping By

Say what you will, but Melissa McCARTHY is undeniably a forced to be reckoned with. Her typical slapstick comedy and over the top raunchy humor simply resonates with audiences, and in the meantime they flock to see everything she does. First off, I loved "Bridesmaids" (I mean who doesn't?). I throughly found tons of enjoyment, and laughs in "The Heat", and I hated "Identity Thief". Her latest, "Tammy" lands smack dab right in the middle. It's not as good as "Bridesmaids" and "The Heat", however it's far lightyears ahead of "Identity Thief". The story comes from director, writer, and husband to McCARTHY Ben Falcone who got the film made on her box office appeal alone. Tammy ... is struggling, going about day to day life. This morning she hit a deer thus totaling her car. She also lost her job at Topperjacks to her egotistical manager (played by Falcone). And to top it off she comes home to find her husband (Nat Faxon) is cheating on her with the next door neighbor (Toni Collette). In a last ditch effort to reclaim her "independence". Tammy decides to go on a cross country road trip (of sorts) with her alcoholic and drug induced Grandmother (played very well by Susan Sarandon). Where "Tammy" severely lacks, it makes up for in McCARTHY's performance. The script is not as tight and condensed as it needs to be. Running at a very modest, and crisp 90-minute run time (something we ALL can be thankful for). The film saves itself from running to long to drag the morale of the audience down with it. Not to mention the cast itself is top notch (another added strength). Featuring a last second addition of Dan Aykroyd, to Mark Duplass and Gary Cole, the list goes on. Even if the script is loose and a retread, if anyone could have pulled this film off.. it was indeed McCARTHY. Weather your a fan or not, you can find something in "Tammy" that will at least make you chuckle. Though it's not consistent enough to be a full fledge comedy blockbuster, and when it falls flat (which it does a-lot) McCARTHY is right there to pick the film back up again. Best Joke? McCARTHY tells a skippy young teen to go eat some bath salts and then eat his girlfriends face off. B- By: Nate Adams for I-Tunes and The Movie Buff blog. Directed By: Ben Falcone Rated: R Run-Time: 96 mins Studio: Warner Bros. Release Date: July 2nd Thanks For Stopping By

Time, and time again the magic of movies have come to surpass the expectations of everyday life. From the events we see on the six o'clock **** the overabundance of violence we see in cinema..what does this have to do with Michael Bay's new film "Transformers: Age Of Extinction"? nothing..I just wanted a cool intro. I sit before you baffled, shocked and well.. obliterated as I feel like I have gone to battle and won. It's been quite some time since the little boy in me could ooze with so much excitement, anxiety and cheer. As only Michael Bay can do with his inept style of filmmaking. Which consists of two things 1) Blow stuff up, and 2) Blow more stuff up, while you are at it, why not just blow more stuff up. This approach has done wonders for his past attempts at filmmakings, speaking for itself. The lucrative and blockbuster famine that is "Transformers". Speaking for myself as a geeky fan boy who walks around aimlessly with an optimus prime on his wallet (judge me). I distinctly fell in love with everything Transformers back in 2009 when Bay and company changed my whole perspective on movies. Which is very rare to do, I might add. Every since, I have worshiped Optimus Prime and the autobots as the neverending saga to defeat Megatron. There is just something about all the destruction, mayhem and action set pieces. Not to mention who can ever pass up a monologue from Optimus Prime. I mean golly, if he gave me a speech to climb mount everest, or fly to the moon you bet your ass I would die trying. So obviously you could say I am biased, but if you want one fans opinion, I suggest you keep reading. Three hugely successful films later, I guess Bay felt the need to "reboot" or "start a new trilogy". Well folks, much like the first film back in 2009 "Transformers: Age Of Extinction" is presumably as advertised. A big budget spectacle that fits right in the middle of a warm Fourth Of July afternoon. The summer movie going season would be nothing, if we didn't have a Transformer movie to grace it. This time shuddering out former star boy Shia LaBeouf and replacing him with a better, leaner, and perhaps, more relatable Mark Wahlberg. At first glance I was appalled that the original cast was being reprimanded. Then again It could be very well for the best. I digress as usual, the film picks up in the aftermath of "Transformers: Dark Of The Moon" where Chicago is left in ruins, and the government wants **** blood in the form of the Transformers. Hence the title "Age of Extinction" The hunt is on going for Optimus and his noble band of renegades that are forced into hiding and the CIA has cut a deal with the ruthless decepticons to get the job done. Optimus unlikely crosses path with Cade Yeager (Wahlberg) an inventor of sorts, the next Albert Einstein of his generation. Also a very stern, strict and passionate father to his only daughter Tris (Nicola Peltz). Cade, fixing junk to make ends meet, finds an abandoned rusted truck in an old closed down movie theater. Which turns out to be, you guessed it, Prime in the flesh. Bringing back a dated war the started long ago. As fate would have it, an enemy foe (much like the last three Transformers) is threatening the fate of Humanity. The biggest question is .. does the audience really care?..I mean I don't know about you ... but I love watching Prime swoop in when all hope is lost and reluctantly kick some ass. It's predictable to a **** its a formula that has been developed, and been proven to work. Some of the lines and bits of dialogue are a bit campy and cheesy (as expected). Kelsey Grammer's character at one point yells "Impossible" and I couldn't help but laugh, considering what movie he has been condensed in. I mean do you see the robots transforming around you? Running a long, and sometimes brutal, two hours and forty four minutes I can't help but attest this film could be shorter. However, when the action is raging and the autobots are destroying heads like it's no tomorrow. Alas the runtime is a breeze. Fans of the genre (like myself) will be frothing at the mouth at the sight of the Dinobots (yes their entrance is all the more entertaining). The climactic battle is also the best the series has yet to offer, putting final battles like "The Avengers" to shame. In addition the visual effects are top notch heavy and it's the same we all come to expect. While some of the characters we literally could care less about. (Including a very funny T.J Miller) Mark Wahlberg as the understandable father Cade Yeager is easy to get along with, and does his absolute best to give us a ground hero worth rooting for, and to a lesser extent. he does. Stanley Tucci also has ideally the best lines in the film..adding some much needed comedic elements to broaden the appeal towards the stunning conclusion. (If you can pay attention, with all the ruckus and mindless explosions taking place in the background) Fans should also notice, while yes, there is humor.. "Transformers: Age Of Extinction" is far more darker then one would anticipate. Secondly, there is plenty of a set up for future installments so I highly doubt this is the last will see of these characters. Bumblebee is back in full swing as usual in his stunning yellow fashion. --The only thing that seemed to bother me the most, was how there was hardly any reference towards the past Transformer films. Not once is there a brief mention of Sam Witwicky (you know, Shia LaBeouf's **** **** one that founded the transformers and saved the world..three times). I understand that the crew is trying to turn a new **** I just find it highly unlikely they all just forgot about the man that made them famous. In the end, don't come to expect nothing new from this film. In fact you should expect bigger and better. Chances are, if you're purchasing a **** already know the ride you're in for. This is a smart technique that has worked wonders for the past installments and now a new bar has been set for the sequels that will grace it. Love, is always a strong word for me to use while discussing a movie. It definitely goes against my better judgement. But I just don't see how it's possible to walk out of this movie, without your heart beating out of your chest (as was mine) all to the tune of the great headliner song "Battle Cry" by Imagine Dragons. As this is just one man's humble opinion. I can agree that well, I loved "Transformers: Age Of Extinction". A By: Nate Adams Directed By: Michael Bay Rated: PG13 Runtime: 164 Mins Release Date: June 27th 2014 Studio: Paramount Pictures Thanks For Stopping By

In the slum-dog age with the likes, and attests of the fortunate merry band of filmmakers turning huge Broadway productions into sensational motion pictures. Audience members, including myself, have seen this across the world; with such well known titles, “Mamma Mia”, “Chicago”, “Rent” and, of course, “Les Miserables”. As fate would have proceeded, we have the wondrous, sometimes oversaturated, and embracing musical flux “Jersey Boys”. The latest musical adaptation to hit the silver screen, and much like the angel voice of Frankie Valli, the film is sweetly visceral, yet profoundly touching. Nine years ago, the subdued Frankie Valli was inducted into a new generation of musical enthusiasts. He was resurrected by the Tony award winning stage production of the same name. From then on, the rest is history. The show, and film, chronicles the story of the rise and fall of the notorious Four Season, or “Frankie Valli & The Four Seasons”. Saving the four crooks from a lifetime of smuggling, dealing and heartache. The band cranked out four unstoppable hits including the likes of; “Sherry”, “Walk Like A Man” and the upbeat, high pitched anthem “Big Girls Don’t Cry” Nobody could argue that these songs aren’t timeless, but granted if you took any song from this era everyone could have a jingle with it. The portion that is seemingly potent is the talented cast, and what is done with the source material. It should only seem fitting that John Lloyd Young take on the role that won him a Tony in 2006, portraying Frankie Valli. Which is truly a remarkable achievement. The vocal pitch-range, is extremely tough to come by naturally. In terms of hitting the notes, and such Young was the “bees knees”. In contrast, I didn’t believe for one second in the opening scenes he was supposed to be 16, when in real life he is actually 38. Believe it or not, looks are deceiving because, when Young opens his mouth and starts belting that high nasal ****. The real show stealer belongs to Vincent Piazza the only actor of the four whom didn’t revive a role from Broadway. (Young, Michael Lomenda, and Erich Bergen all played their same characters from the stage production). The flow, consistency and humble brutality that Piazza enfuses into the ruthless thug, Tommy DeVito is one for the books. I was immensely captivated and enriched everytime he graced the screen. If there’s only just a reason to see “Jersey Boys” Piazza’s performance is that reason. Michael Lomenda, who portrays Nick Massi the bands bass player, and Erich Bergen playing the bands lead writer Bob Gaudio are evenly spot on, even if their accents could use a little work. It doesn’t hurt that they previously played these roles, so to them it’s eerily comfortable, and that relaxation shows. Christopher Walken also steps into the limelight as the mentor and welcoming Gyp. Being helmed by a legend all the same as it’s band of misfits, Director Clint Eastwood takes the source material one step ahead of the bunch. Crafting a larger than scale buffet of musical endeavours, and stage churning performances that easily cater to the talented crew in front of the camera. With the huge ticket sales, much like Les Mis, still pouring in; a live film adaptation seemed financially plausible. Which doesn’t mean the film doesn’t surrcomb with it’s fair share of flaws, there are a few. Running times have been a keen issue with films lately. “Jersey Boys” at times thinks it’s a stage production, and can keep up with the pace it sets. While evidently this portrays quite nicely early on, however, once the two hour mark pulls up; the audience is left feeling a bit clogged. Ideally, the biggest fault, we also never really get to know the man behind the music. Frankie Valli is an impeccable persona, that would have been ideal to know. However, when you only have a set time frame, and strict studio restrictions; what else could be done, or cut to fit the time allotted?. Eastwood does his best to make sure we have a deeper connection within the film’s main protagonists. Including breaking the coveted fourth wall which, in my oh so humble opinion, made the film all the more worthwhile. In addition, giving the context of the story, the film is told through the lifespans of the band. Which means each actor had to portray each character from early teens to late sixties. These actors are talented. However, when you see the final scene there are no favors given by the makeup department. Given all the critical backlash from Eastwood’s past (I’m looking at you “J Edgar”) you would think some thought would be given. Alas, I digress. Still, when it boils down. The film earns the name “Jersey Boys” and for most musical enfucatinatos, this adaptation will likely get the good graces among that community. Even though I wanted to spend more time with these characters. I was distinctly satisfied with where things ended, and transcended all the same. The music will continue for generations to come, and thanks to this film it can live on just a little bit more. B+ By: Nate Adams Directed By: Clint Eastwood Rated: R Run-Time: 140 mins Studio: Warner Bros. Release Date: June 20th 2014 Thanks For Stopping By

Well, we can't deny it to ourselves anymore. The gaping tundra of Winter is beyond us, and for that I say we are officially in the midst of the summer movie going season. Sequels, sequels, and more sequels are filling the gaps every weekend, 16 to be exact. Sooner or later, goodwill from post franchises are going to run out. This is not the case with the returning favorites of the beloved "How To Train Your Dragon". "Dragon" was a film nobody, not even myself, suspected of being the next best **** it was. A little film from Dreamworks Animation, that distinctly gave Pixar a run for their money. The animation was gorgeous, the story even more so. A voice cast that included Gerard Butler, Jay Baruchel, Craig Ferguson and Jonah Hill. One could perhaps argue that something is "missing" from this sequel, I would argue not. "How To Train Your Dragon 2" stands on its own, not as a sequel, but as an endearing story of hope, forgiveness, and courage. Our favorite characters are back in full swing. Taking place five years after the events in the first film. Hiccup (Baruchel) and his cohorts are all young adults now, serving as dragon riders in Berk. Who now are living peacefully among the towns people. The curiosity of Hiccup has grown immensely, and the world he thought he knew has opened up wider than he could ever imagine. Dealing with the added stress of being appointed his righteous father, Stoick (Gerard Butler) successor, and his tough as nails girlfriend Astrid (America Ferrera). Hiccup's curiosity eventually gets him caught by a notorious dragon warrior, which eventually turns out to be his long lost mother Valka (Cate Blanchett). Hiccup then discovers the plans of an imminent attack by the ruthless Drago Bludvist, a dragon hunter who will stop at nothing until his army is complete. Furthermore, the main success here lies within the brilliant character development. I recently saw in an article by Entertainment Weekly in which they compared the characters, I saw a sluggish standing, dependent Hiccup being compared to a 20 year old, one legged and tough Hiccup, and to be honest I couldn't be more happier. As with time, it evidently changes everyone. While sure Hiccup and his friends are "growing facial hair", riding on the backs of dragons like it's nothing. Hiccup has become more than a sensational character to root for, rather a Luke Skywalker for this younger generation. We also can't have this film if not for the loveable mascot and poster child; Toothless. The silly, charming and fun Night Fury dragon, that stole our hearts back in 2008. Equally, the story is just as good, if not better, than the original. The first one had the added pressure of society accepting dragons. Now they have but, face a greater threat than before. In the form of Drago Bludvist, who's rip-roaring voice is brought to spectacular life by Djimon Hounsou. For a childrens film; his antics are a bit darker than most villains you would see. Younger children may be frightened by his overall appearance. However, from my standpoint, I felt he was a worthy adversary for our crew of heroes. A Darth Vader to Hiccup's Skywalker. I also enjoyed the new character Erin (voiced by Game Of Thrones own Kit Harrington). Of course, some will likely attest that the film's characters are a bit too harsh, or deafening. Some storybook concepts will likely have to be explained to some youngsters. There is an emotional integrity to be upheld here, and director Dean DeBois keeps that formula that made it's predecessor all the more credible. Including characters we care more about, then we have had before. I found little squabbles here and there of certain action set pieces that perhaps felt out of place. If speaking figuratively it never once took away from my fulfillment and satisfaction. Most sequels tend to overdo it, others just wreck it's potential franchise. The old saying as it goes "if it ain't broken, don't fix it". "How To Train Your Dragon 2" is an emotionally charged, and high flying adventure. The animation is breathtaking, and better than it has every been. I find it hard looking at this film as a sequel, partially because it's so well done that it stands on its own. Which in any sequel is rare. I can only imagine what the future has in store for our lovable band of characters. I do know one thing, "How To Train Your Dragon 2" falls in that 5 percent of sequels that actually builds on their predecessor. A By: Nate Adams Directed By: Dean DeBois Rated: PG Runtime: 108 mins Studio: Dreamworks Animation (Fox) Release Date: June 13th 2014 Thanks for Stopping By

Channing Tatum, and Jonah Hill..such an odd ball pairing in every way shape or form. A buff macho, and dull headedness, mixed with a brainy, textual and lame counterpart. Who would think this pairing could, and most importantly, should work. Their names; Chris Lord and Phil Lord, the creative duo behind the fresh and lively revival of the series that made Johnny Depp famous. In contrast of course I'm speaking in regards to the highly successful 2012 sleeper hit "21 Jump Street". A buddy cop action comedy, that knew no boundaries and greatly stumbled where others have gone before, and all the same felt original, unique and it was very, very funny. I can't say the same for it's uptight, overly obsessive sequel. Amply titled "22 Jump Street". (In case you're wondering, they moved across the street). Sure we have the original team on board for more mischief and mayhem. Doing almost word for word the exact same thing. "Do what you did the first **** everyone's happy". I can say, to an extent that this approach works, and for many moviegoers they will appreciate it. I just missed the improvisation and flamboyance that made it's predecessor memorable. Surprises at every corner. Granted, "22 Jump Street" has enough surprises, comedic wit, and action to make it mildly enjoyable for the audience it's strictly geared towards. Fans looking for a decent follow-up, should look no further. Because, there is a lot of the same, and nothing else. Schmidt and Jenko are back. Promising on the goodwill from the last one "you two .. are going to college" and finally we are made good on this promise. There is, of course, a new synthetic drug at MC State where the two must, evade into the personal lives of their fellow classmates, and neighbors, or "Infiltrate the dealer...find the supplier". To describe it blunty. Arguably, the best notion about the screenplay, penned by Josh Mccall and Jonah Hill was it's ability to take Schmidt and Jenko's relationship farther than before. It's probably best to pick up a copy of "21 Jump St" before seeing it's sequel, as there are many references that you may have forgotten. Rest assured for fans not familiar with the first one, the film opens with a funny recap of the events that took place on "21 Jump Street". While some things never change, the fauq identities "Doug" and "Brad" McQuaid are still in tact. Channing Tatum's Brad gets to experience the popular side of things now, while Jonah Hill's Doug sits on the sidelines, literally. The two sort of branch out, and do their thing. "Brad" gets to live his dreams of playing Football, and maybe one day drive that lamborghini. In addition "Doug" is playing the opposite of his post "high school days" there is no charismatic Dave Franco to lean on this time. The action set pieces are actually quite impressive. I was in tuned more with the plot this time around then I was previously, which is a good thing. I guess. Did I really wanna be motivated by an intricate of plot points? not entirely. Will I take em? sure, why not. Never is it more diverse than it needs to be. The jokes kind of up the ante a little bit. There are two or three laugh out loud jokes, instead of having the same consistency and flow the original had. Believe me. when "22 Jump Street" is funny, it's pretty comical all the same. In addition, the softness that Tatum brings to Jenko is like a teddy bear. You can't be mad or angry ever, because he is just sensitive. There is a good bit about how, Jenko takes a Sexuality class.. and all of sudden becomes an advocate for gay rights. "I said a lot of gay slurs in high school" he refers to his partner, to which Hill responds amicably "yeah most of them directed at me". These are the scenes that propel the film. That goodwill unfortunately lags after about the first hour. If you can believe it, the best jokes in the film actually belong to Ice Cube, who returns as the loud mouth, and stereotypical police chief. The best joke lies between him and Jonah Hill's character, I won't spoil it for you, however, it's a great joke worth the price of admission alone. In the end, of course the budget is obviously bigger, and, as with most, sequels usually tend to overdo it a tad. Phil Lord and Chris Miller take the time with certain advancements, but are given a slew of extras that, was underutilized. Rarely is a sequel good, and it's even more rare to be better than it's predecessor. I can say that "22 Jump Street" tries it's best, and never succeeds. Jonah Hill and Tatum are great together. The two have remarkable on screen chemistry. When you have a film as golden as "21 Jump Street" it's always going to be tough to top it. While my sheer opinion won't sway anyone from seeing this film. Sadly, "22 Jump Street" is another sequel in a long line, that has failed to live up to it's already high standards set before it. C+ By: Nate Adams Directed By: Phil Lord, and Chris Miller Rated: R Runtime: 118 mins Studio: Sony Release Date: June 13th 2014 Thanks For Stopping By.

Life comes at us in full swing.. 24/7, we never know the boundaries of our limitations always taking things further and beyond anything we, as society, imagine. I'm not a typical schultz when it comes to sappy romantic novels, or love stories of any genre. To be honest, they inflame me. Setting up unrealistic approaches to how "love" is supposed to be. In the end, someone is left dead or crying. Now, before I start to sound like a weeping school girl, I give you the film "The Fault In Our Stars" which I must say.. is a rare, rare exception. A film that never exploits itself too much, and has relentless humor that perfectly balances the fatal backdrop. I have not read the acclaimed novel from author John Green. However, In the days leading up to this screening, I had heard nothing but positive things about the book. It's clear now after seeing the film, what a tremendous band of characters, and a touching story that Green has vastly **** to him I say well done. The movie chronicles the events of Hazel Grace Lancaster, a sixteen year old, dealing with the everyday struggle of living with her terminal (but treatable) cancer. With no friends and nothing look to forward to in life, The film also follows the unforgettable journey of love when she meets Augustus Waters, a likeable and pretentious eighteen year old that is persistent and charming. The two instantly hit it off, and form a bond that is unbreakable. To the point that nothing can separate them. Co-existing in each others lives, and finding the true meaning of each other. We can't have this film, if not for our stunning and talented leads. You may remember the pair as on screen siblings in the film adaptation of "Divergent" that came out earlier this year. But, "true" audience members are going to remember them for playing, Hazel Grace Lancaster, and Augustus Waters. I'm talking about Shailene Woodley, and her **** leading man Ansel Elgort. The two are miraculous to watch on screen together, easily the best chemistry between any romance since, Rachel McAdams & Ryan Gosling in "The Notebook". (Yes I've seen that movie too...shocking I know). Ansel Elgort is truly coming into his own as a delicate performer. However, this time around the film belongs to Woodley and her mastery of Hazel Grace. So much passion, so much raw material infused into her grief stricken performance, that ..dare I say.. brought me to tears. Hazel is such a fragile character, and you understand this within the opening credits. The mental stability and such all seemed to come natural to Woodly, whom made me feel so much within a two hour time frame. Great supporting work also comes from long time favorite Willem Dafoe, as well as, Laura Dern, Nat Wolff and Sam Trammell. They round out the film and make it feel whole. Woodley was undoubtedly ****, but we can't say it's nothing without Ansel Elgort and his charismatic charm, memorable metaphors and wit he brings to the character of Augustus Waters. In addition, this film is only going to be as good are your two leads, and that's usually where the problem lies, this is never the case in this film. Director Josh Boone gets the most out of his performers and writers Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Webber do the justice (I believe) is deserved. Of course, as history would have it, I assume the book is better. In Comparison we look at other films like "The Vow", "Safe Haven" and even "Endless Love" ..was there anything here to create a likeable basis?..that didn't stumble into a crate of **** horrendous stupidity?. Those films are not love stories..there simply are films attempting to create one. Besides a film like "The Notebook", and "The Fault In Our Stars" only come along every so often.. It's sad that a film like "The Vow" was based on an actual true ****. do in heavy to the belligerents of the director and cast, I didn't believe it for a second. Our Director, Josh Boone takes these giant cliches and simply washes away with them, inflicting some strong emotional damage, and a film you think about long after leaving your local multiplex. Anyone that has ever dealt with cancer, the loss of a loved one, anything tough of this latitude in general will feel a resounding connection with this film. Even for folks that haven't read the book (like myself). "The Fault In Our Stars" is deeply moving and swiftly upbeat all the same, which is saying alot for me. The movie perfectly balances it's tough subject matter. The only problem I couldn't get **** that Shailene Woodley did look a little too older to be playing a quote on quote "sixteen year old", which didn't ruin the **** just hurt the credibility a little bit. As stated earlier, it's extremely rare to come across such a love story that can evoke a genuine feel that doesn't seem dated or overly excessive. A story that is entertaining but not preachy. You either buy into it, or you don't. Thanks to strong leads, a bunch of talented crew members, writers and directors that brought this all together. "The Fault In Our Stars" works on a grander scale as a whole, and if this film doesn't pull on your heartstrings. I don't know what will. A By: Nate Adams Directed By: Josh Boone Rated: PG13 Runtime: 126 mins Studio: Fox Release Date: June 6th 2014 Thanks For Stopping By.

Back in December when I went to a screening of "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" I was intrigued when the first trailer advertised was "Edge of Tomorrow". The first thing that sparked my interest was to see the film opening in the heat of summer, and NOT being a sequel of some sorts and reboot. Secondly, Tom Cruise and the odd ball pairing of Emily Blunt. And Thirdly, Director Doug Liman. After months of speculation, leading up to the film's initial release, I was worrisome. How can an original Sci-Fi open up in the midst of the summer movie going season and stand its own?. Granted, two years ago we had "Prometheus" but that was more a prequel than "original". Anyhow, "Edge Of Tomorrow" adversely sets itself apart from other big budget spectacles this year. You would never think that the whole "Groundhog Day" meets "Independence Day" angle would ever work. But it does. Tom Cruise is kind of in his typical wheelhouse, not playing the big budget action hero he is stereotyped as. Which also gives the movie some added credibility. Aside from him, Emily Blunt evenly matches her co-star, and actually is impressive to watch on screen together. The story is set in the backdrop, where humans have been at war for five years against an alien menace, called Mimics. The NATO militaries have created an ultimatum to fight the ongoing invasion, there called Jackets. Which are an exoskeleton body armor suit which are equipped to the bone with heavy aliterlary. Cruise plays Major William Cage. a fidgety, egotistical and plan marketing expert whose sole job is to ensure the public enlist in the on going fight. Then there is Rita Vratarski (Blunt) more like a channeling "Rosie The Riveter" of this generation. Rita and Cage unlikely cross paths in the midst of battle, where Cage has gained accessed to a supernatural ability or "time loop", whereas every time he is killed, the day prior starts over or "resets". The two must form a bond, and live to fight each day and harvest the power of the Mimics in order to ensure humanity's survival. Some, actually most, will likely argue that the action scenes, creature design and so forth are the films greatest strengths. I attest to those attributes, but I genuinely feel the film's greatest strengths lies within the screenplay, and the performance of Tom Cruise. In the beginning were susceptible, thinking Cruise is likely playing his normal "Top Gun" or "Mission Impossible" persona, however, this is never the case. The growth of Cruise's character, William Cage is worth the price of admission alone. I love how the audience goes from knowing a skirmish guy that has to ask constantly "Where is the safety?" to the end, where he is busting loads of bullets into alien sc*m, the only way he sees fit. It's honestly quite impressive. Emily Blunt is fun also, while not being able to take her seriously maybe a tad hard, but her persona was perfect, and she's not your normal leading lady. Instead, she evenly pits herself against the big guns (no pun intended) and swings with full blast. Another greater strength to this film, is that it balances it's comic relief with stylized sci-fi sequences that feels like a breath of fresh air. From the over intoxication of deaths on screen, nobody could ever tell you they don't enjoy a laugh or two. Of course, with the strengths comes the weaknesses. Where most film's problems is the pacing, "Edge Of Tomorrow" kind of suffers from lack thereof. Essentially, every five minutes the film is basically set in a spiral motion, and then bam, the whole relive every day plot sinks in, and becomes tasteless after a while. This never distracted from my overall enjoyment. I can say, however, I was a little fatigue with where things ended up. Including a satisfying conclusion, that was a tad rushed, and won't leave you feeling cheated. (Even though the ending, for lack of some better words, COULD have been better). At the end of the day, weather your sci-fi geek, Tom Cruise extraordinaire, or any of the above. Doug Liman's "Edge Of Tomorrow" has a little something from everyone. And if you have the option .. it looks and sound's stunning in IMAX 3D B+ By: Nate Adams Directed By: Doug Liman Rated: PG13 RunTime: 106 mins Release Date: June 6th 2014 Studio: Warner Bros. Thanks For Stopping By.

What is there in this world that Seth MacFarlane doesn’t do? writer, actor, singer, voice of beloved animated characters. Most folks will know MacFarlane from his work on the beloved “Family Guy” television show. However, more folks (like myself), know him for creating the word of mouth sensation, and comedy blockbuster “Ted”. The little film that could, that film easily went on to become the highest grossing original R rated comedy of all time. So there is only one way to go...down. MacFarlane is back in the directing chair (and starring front in center) in his new Western Comedy, “A MIllion Ways To Die In The West” a lampoon on the whole western frontier, that severely overstayed it’s welcome. For roughly the first thirty to forty minutes, the film was consistent. Chopped full of witty one-liners and decent charismatic charm from MacFarlane. So much so, the script is ideally the result of its own downfall. Once the premise and characters get introduced, it’s kind of like the crew did not know where to take their film after the first hour. The plot is very thin, and with a cast such as; Liam Neeson, Charlize Theron and Amanda Seyfried, I had never seen more underutilized characters in a film. I wanna suggest the film for it’s fun spin on the old west, and believe me when I say the first forty minutes is pure comedic gold, consistent and funny. After that, nothing special to write home about. Albert Stark (MacFarlane) is a weak sheep farmer, forced to live in the backdrop of a harsh 1862 Arizona “wild wild west”, where in fact there are a million ways to die. From huge ice blocks crushing your **** your local pastor taking justice into his own hands. Even wolves devouring your local mayor..nobody is safe. After his gold digging girlfriend (Amanda Seyfried) dumps Albert for a local “mustache” salesmen (Neil Patrick Harris). Albert is determined to prove his worth and win his girlfriend back. That is until, a new girl breezes into town, (Charlize Theron) or “the big guns” and teaches Albert a thing or two. Little does he know. She is the wife of the most vicious gun fighter in the territory Clinch (Liam Neeson). Just another way to die in the lonely west. Typically, westerns are an unusual sell at the box office. So I uphold MacFarlane for taking a more risky approach to the genre and making it more widespread, and appealing. The film is shot decently and has a great musical score that only MacFarlane can present. The main problem the film suffers from (as many of them are) is the Run-time. The film staggers out at about two hours and ten minutes … I mean what?!. Comedies (such as this one) only need about an hour and thirty to get the message across. MacFarlane tries to jam pack too much “West” down your throat. Like a dying car, the start is so full of **** then runs out ..and coasts on goodwill ..from “Ted” and “Family Guy” ..which can only go so far. When discussing cast’s, this is one of the better ensembles in recent memory. Giovanni Ribisi, Charlize Theron, Liam Neeson, Sarah Silverman, NPH and Amanda Seyfried. Seth MacFarlane also showcases his one (of many) talents. However, when getting down to the basics, there is just too many of them to keep track off. Not to mention a boring running gag with Neil Patrick Harris character and his overzealousness with having a mustache. There is a few memorable cameos in the film, and some nice jabs at the west as well. “A Million Ways To Die In The West” started off with so much potential, the idea, premise and characters. When your watching (or reviewing) a comedy .. the main thing I can stress is, consistency. If the film outpaces itself, it will just eventually fall downhill. This is a hard feature to acquire, most comedies tend to find pacing hard. There are rare exceptions (The World’s End, Hangover and even “Ted”). MacFarlane has a unique vision and entices enough goodwill that should fill seats. The broad and raunchy humor will appeal to younger crowds, but adults may find it repulsive and idiotic. There needs to be a definitive line, and sadly “A Million Ways To Die In The West” never finds one. D+ By: Nate Adams Directed By: Seth MacFarlane Rated: R Run-Time: 130 mins Studio: Universal Pictures Release Date: May 30th 2014 Thanks For Stopping By.

In my adolescents, much like every kid in my class, and more thereafter. Ask any kid growing up in the late 90s and early 2000s, when comic book movies were just starting to become a reality. Before “The Avengers”, before “Iron Man” and yes..even before “Spider-Man”..there was only a select squad of superheroes I knew..well not superheroes..mutants. Wolverine, Magneto, Professor X, Cyclops, Mystique..just to name a few. They were called The X-Men, and not only did they inspire me as a child, after seeing their latest adventure, they have inspired me as an adult now too. The film reunites long time fan boy favorite director Bryan Singer (X-Men and X2) with the best cast of characters anyone this side of earth could ever ask for. If we put, The Avengers up against the X-Men, hands down I put my money on the X-Men any day. “X-Men Days Of Future Past” brought me back to when I was a child, playing with those small Wolverine action figures and what not, running around pretending I had claws coming out of my hands. The past couple solo outings (“X-Men Origins” & “The Wolverine”) were both artistic disappointments. Not because the character was bad, instead the misguided direction. I can say now, with a clear conscious, these faults have been drastically altered. Singer returns to soaring new heights, creating filmmaking at it’s finest. Would I call this film “The Best Superhero Film Ever” ? heavens no. But, a film that defies itself through its core, and characters. There is so much in this film analytically. That as a critic, (in training) … it’s so brutally touching to watch. Could I just be a fanboy serenading the film? well jeez, I sure hope so. The film chronicles the events after “The Wolverine” and all other previous X-Men **** this is a true sequel. Not a reboot, or prequel. Not since “X-Men: The Last Stand” have we gotten great story progressing. Set in the distant future; mutants are becoming extinct. At the helm of their greatest foe, that any mutant has ever faced. The Sentinel Primes. At a last ditch effort to save the Mutant race, Logan (Wolverine) is sent back in time to convince the young Charles Xavier to use his powers and alter the past-- to ensure that Mutants have a future. Resulting in quite possibly the greatest dream time of the century. Nonetheless, what makes “X:Men Days of Future Past” so incredibly unique is that well .. it benefits from having the entire cast of characters. Bringing back the young favorites that made “X:Men First Class” unforgettable. In addition bringing back the old favorites from the original trilogy. This has to be the greatest ploy and gimmick of the year. I **** can contest that seeing Hugh Jackman's ragin’ cagin’ Wolverine fighting alongside Magneto and Beast in the 1960s? .. if speaking bluntly it’s like a dream come true. Not to mention we get a more than suitable cameo from the beloved “Quicksilver” whom undoubtedly has one of the best scenes in the entire film. The performance end of things is fairly top notch. Jackman simply owns the role of Wolverine and give his most eagerly pleasing rendition of the character to date. James McAvoy as the young Charles Xavier ...this casting was a pure stroke of genius. Jennifer Lawrence, Patrick Stewart, Ian Mckellen, Nicholas Hoult all turn in fine performances. But, the real show stealer belongs to Michael Fassbender and his tremendous take on our beloved Magneto. It’s amazing to see his growth in the character. Could you believe that Fassbender was actually in the film “Jonah Hex”??? yeah I didn’t think so. The film is as good as the cast, and director. Thanks to this scene churning performances, it only adds to the benefactor of “DOFP” and ultimately makes it that much more captivating. There are some funny one-liners and sight gags, but these never deteriorate from the very dark, and eluded tone the film has for most of it’s quick, and breezy two and half hour run time. In contrast, the film is beautifully shot to no end. Singer has a keen sense of detail which is exactly why he was the perfect tribute to helm such a hefty project. Singer, gives the core fans everything they want in an X-Men **** distinctly, so much more. “DOFP” is quick and energized to the point, where I was stunned when the film reached it’s very satisfying conclusion. True Marvel fans shall stick around after the credits for a glimpse of what’s to come. Consequently, any audience member needs to sit down, strap on the seat belt and hold on. Funny, how just a little over a month ago we were discussing how “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” propelled the genre to new heights and set an unprecedented par. While, I think that these films are part of two totally different universes (which they are). But, “DOFP” has more than eclipsed that benchmark set just a month ago. A By: Nate Adams

Most folks tend to find a hard line between comedy and slapstick. Hardly ever is there a movie that can balance the two, and succeed. There is, however, one man that goes to no bounds to try and captivate his audience, well...captivate is a strong word, in fact, I now regret using the word “captivate”. Regardless, the comedian i’m summing up is the talented and (sometimes) funny, Adam Sandler. The latest comedy, shockinlingy doesn't come from long time directing partner, Dennis Dugan. Instead, “Zookeeper” director Frank Coreci is taking the helm on the comedy “Blended”. “Blended” marks the third on screen appearance of the “dream team” and this time by “dream team” I mean Drew Barrymore and Sandler. Their last two films together “The Wedding Singer” and “50 First Dates” are timeless, and to this day I still value and appreciate those films. Partially because the chemistry between Barrymore and Sandler was so real. This time around in “Blended” while yes the chemistry is still there, after three films I have to admit, the on screen “magic” does fade away, and much like EVERY film of it’s genre before it, “Blended” falls into a slew of dumbfounded gags, that will satisfy a toddler. Oddly enough the film does have more sentimentality then you would think, and there is a decent comedic performance put forth by our two charming leads. Jim Friedman (Sandler) is a widower with three daughters, and Lauren Reynolds is a divorcee with two sons. The two are set up on a blind date then goes horribly wrong. One thing leads to another and well.. look we are in Africa. The audience never needs to understand how or why the two families end up in the same place, because..well that’s the story. At it’s best “Blended” reminded me of the days when Sandler would make genuine and quality films. Releasing garbage like “Jack and Jill” and “That’s My Boy” also in comparison, “Grown Ups 2” each of these films had benefits of their own doubt, but undoubtedly they all lacked that classic Sandler effect..that was..well… funny. Barrymore has not really made a film in quite some time, and I thought the on-screen romance was a bit too cliche for my taste, but believable enough to the point where I could surcomb to the flaws. The film has a somewhat family friendly rating, I don’t necessarily know If I would let my children watch some of the jokes in this film, which at times are extremely offensive, and the jokes leave no one unscathed. The African characters all fall into vicious stereotypes. However, I couldn't help myself but laugh at the timing of Terry Crews, and his signing capella group that showed up at all the awkward moments in the film. Besides, I never believed for one second this film was actually shot in Africa, because other than a few shots of Giraffes and Zebra’s thrown in. This was the worst set up of any “Africa” set I had seen. In the end, if speaking honestly, “Blended” is harmless and heartfelt. Well it maybe a little too crude and vulgar for younger children. Some families could find “Blended” to be a viable option for moviegoing. I would suggest to tread lightly. It’s nowhere near the levels of “Wedding Singer” and “50 First Dates”. But, if we’re talking comparisons it’s a much better Sandler outing in the last couple years. The film of course is extremely predictable, and goes in the exact direction most people would suspect. So never I was surprised. In addition some of the gags we’re just plain childish and I’m not going to conjure my time and effort explaining them to you. When it comes to the movie “Blended” use your best judgment, and decide just how much you like Adam Sandler. C By: Nate Adams Directed By: Frank Coreci Rated: PG13 Run-Time: 111 mins Release Date: May 23rd 2014 Studio: Warner Bros Pictures Thanks For Stopping By.

Destruction, destruction .. and well, even more destruction. Chances are if someone had approached me a year or two ago, and told me I was going to fall in love with the re-imagining of “Godzilla”, I would have proceeded to call you, and I quote “A crazy lunatic”. Thankfully, no-one approached me with such an acquisition Because, like everyone else, nobody thought a remake of “Godzilla” would be as lively, thought provoking, and most importantly, character driven. I remember scrounging on my laptop a couple years ago, squawking at the news of another “Godzilla” film. I mean, did you see the 1998 Roland Emmerich directed version? .. for your sake I hope not. Small time director Gareth Edwards (his only previous film was a small indie flick called “Monsters” currently available on Netflix streaming). I digress, Edwards had so much to prove to such a fanbase of a film. Not only does this crew succeed, they have obliterated any bad taste that the forsaken ‘98’ version left inside everyone’s mouth. Where to begin is such a question of concern, there is so much ground to cover. While yes indeed the film is called “Godzilla” trust me, you are not reading your ticket stub wrong. The point I’m attempting to make is, “Godzilla” has his presence in the film. However, Edwards does a flawless job at executing characters that we (the audience) can actually relate and appreciate. I found that to be the film’s greater strengths. The ability to capture the emotional integrity that make this film worth investing in. Aaron Taylor-Johnson (Kick Ass) has finally made a film worth writing home about, (only joking, I loved the Kick Ass films). The film is told across a few spanning time periods. After a nuclear power plant outside of Tokyo leaves the city in ruins, and eventually a quarantine zone. 15 years later, former plant supervisor, Joe Brody (Bryan Cranston) is still coping with the loss of his wife, in the tragic accident and the distraught relationship with his son. Ford (Johnson) who is now an explosive ordinance disposal officer. With a wife, Ellie (Elizabeth Olsen) and son living in San Francisco. One thing leads to another, and eventually, something awakens. Another being, from inside the old plant. A “MUTO” or Massive Unidentified Terrestrial Organism. Causing a tundra of mayhem. and an other worldly creature known as “Godzilla” to surface. Let the games begin. I was meaglery impressed with the ambition behind these filmmakers, and staying true to their authentic source material. Not settling for generic monster designs, and boring spectacle. In fact something “real” and dare I say … original? (GASP!). Yes those words are correct. Shot in stunning 3D. The world’s biggest monster, should be captured on the biggest screen. (IMAX 3D is nothing short of breathtaking). When the big fiery monster lets out his first roar, you better hold on for a fun ride. Although, the big friendly giant does not make his first screen appearance till an hour into the picture. The build up is spectacular. The claws spiking out of the pacific ocean, or the shadow in the dust. The talins in the distance. These feelings are suspenseful and mind bending. They only add to the intensity. (May contain minor spoilers) Of course, the film has some very minor flaws (very minor) this is just me being picky. For starters, the wife (Elizabeth Olsen) was a basic throwaway character that added nothing to the plot. Other than to add that whole relationship (which makes sense, I understand, people want a love story). I also felt that some of the cast was underutilized. Most importantly, Bryan Cranston. For the very brief time we see Cranston, he turns in one caliber of a performance. For being nearly sixty years old, the man is a true gem to watch on screen. Aside from these minor instances, the film runs very smoothly. The visual effects team worked tirelessly and this easily shows through the many layers, the film possesses. The climax in its entirety is something for the record books (and bought my sold out crowd to roaring applause). Something that rarely happens screening a film is my ability to suspend all and every disbelief. Sure, to an extent you need to, A movie like “Godzilla” requires that and more. The entire two hour run-time I was immersed in an experience that makes going to the movies, awesome. From the outstanding cast, director and visual effects team. Everything works for this re-imagining of “Godzilla” from the tight, dense and eagerly pleasing screenplay, to the final battle that is .. jawdropping. Gareth Edwards has not only pleased his many fans, but has subdued himself into full throttle, as one of the best directors stylizing films today. I had such a blast watching our titular hero going to work. Amidst all the destruction, there is a plot that is character focused, and can pull on the heart-tugs. “Godzilla” has roared, and everyone around the world has heard him. One of the best films so far this year. A- By: Nate Adams Directed By: Gareth Edwards Rated: PG13 Run-Time: 123 mins Studio: Warner Bros Pictures Release Date: May 16th 2014 Thanks For Stopping Buy.

Disney is ideally one of the more respected studios producing films to this day. Nobody can look at their film and marketing tactics and call them dull. However, just because a movie has “Disney” on it, doesn’t necessarily make it indestructible. Their latest, “Million Dollar Arm” a basic, run of the mill, inspirational film that follows the same basic principles all sports dramas follow. The story is heartfelt and genuine, and the film is fueled by an extremely likable performance from our leading man Jon Hamm. This only goes so far. Comparing the film to the likes of “Miracle” or “The Rookie” and even “Remember The Titans” is not a fair comparison. Because, even though those films also followed basic principles, those films still had credibility to their names and directors. “Million Dollar Arm” is slow going and takes it’s time progressing the plot. Just on the likability of the actors presence in the film, “Million Dollar Arm” is barely watchable for the most part. But, in all honestly, is nothing special. Hamm plays J.B Bernstein, a typical sports agent, who in a last ditch effort to save his job, and the jobs of his cohorts; Ash Vasudevan (Bernstein’s business partner) and Theresa. Bernstein pitches the idea of “Million Dollar Arm” in which the crew travels to India, seeking Baseball players, through a reality show. On the journey they find two Indians, named Dinish Patel and Rinku Singh. Who doesn't love a good, and compelling underdog story?. Typically, it’s fairy hard to scowl at the confines of a true story. However, when the story is not that, quote “compelling” well it’s a different breed of these sub-genre. This is hardly a true story most people are familiar with. Being honest, I was unfamiliar with this story until I screened the film. I’m glad I got the message in all. Speaking bluntly, this is a film where audience’s will walk out, say “it was good”, tell their friends, and one week later forget all about it. As a shame it maybe, the whole “salesman” approach to the plot, never clicks. The acting, on the other hand, is slick and witty. Jon Hamm is quick and fun to watch as the infamous, J.B Bernstein. Lake Bell is also great to watch, however the character is partially underused. As well as, Madhur Mittal and Suraj Sharma who turn in more than exceptional performances. Director Greg Gillespie has had some success, his remake of “Fright Night” starring Anton Yelchin and Colin Farrell was more than worthy in the sense. “Million Dollar Arm” was just not a great story for him to showcase his talents. I still have hope for his directing career. In the end, I didn't hate “Million Dollar Arm” I just did not buy into the whole story as whole. Once you have seen every inspiration film in this league, well you have seen them all. The film has tons of heart and the characters are extremely likable. This is not the problem. The problem is the very basic and average attempt at telling the story. The film never breaks away from it’s own pattern and steers exactly the direction we expect it too. Granted, this is a true story so we know the outcome. Other than a few interesting tidbits, and outside of true Baseball fanatics nobody is going to know this story well enough. I also wish the story focused more on the actual people the story is based off. Hardly ever, does the audience get any back story behind our India natives becoming Major League Baseball players. Even a little more development into J.B Bernstein's life would have been more appreciated. There is very little accomplished in the two hour run-time. “Million Dollar Arm” is instantly forgettable, but in the end somewhat watchable. Thanks to that “Disney” brand. C By: Nate Adams Directed By” Greg Gillespie Rated: PG Run-Time: 123 mins Studio: Walt Disney Pictures Release Date: May 16th 2014 Thanks For Stopping Buy

In a summer that is filled to the bone with high levels of explosions, slinging webs, and carnivorous apes. But, on the other hand, if you look closely that lightly seeded throughout the busiest movie going season, we do get a splash of genuine heartfelt comedies. We saw this last year with “We’re The Millers” and the beloved “This Is The End” and previous years with the likes of “Horrible Bosses”. While it comes sooner than expected, with summer 2014 already stacked high with tons of R-rated comedies. The new film “Neighbors” gets to draw first blood. From the creative team of Seth Rogen, Evan Goldberg, and director Nicholas Stoller. While the film’s premise is intriguing enough, and believe me there are plenty of laughs to go around. However, in terms of the teams best, “Neighbors” is nowhere near the levels as last summer’s “This Is The End”, a film this team also had a huge stake in. However, thanks to the quick witted comedic timing of co-star Zac Efron, and the high velocity and energy levels of on-screen couple, Seth Rogen, and the always funny Rose Byrne “Neighbors” is hilarious. Although the film falls into a slew of typical plot patterns. Though towards the end of the film’s duration, the humor, the jokes, and the message (if you can find it) are more than enough to equip “Neighbors” under another successful entry into the other Seth Rogen films that have preceded it. The film follows “Big” Mac Radner (Rogen) and his wife Kelly (Byrne) a young couple with a newborn baby, Stella. Which prohibits them from living a fun, and engaging life. Including their long time friends. This eventually leads to several failed attempts to maintain their old lifestyle (including a decision to take their baby to a rave). These thoughts are immediately thwarted when a fraternity Delta Psi, known for their outrageous parties, move in next door. Lead by president Teddy Sanders (Efron) and VP Pete Ragzolli (Dave Franco). The Couple eventually breaks a secluded promise they endeared to Teddy. Stating that if they had any issues, they won’t call the police and instead talk to them personally. Thus causing a righteous uproar and bidding the war, as the tagline suggests, “Family vs Frat”. If we look at the other films Nicholas Stoller has helmed including; “Pineapple Express”, “The Sitter” and...yeah .. “Your Highness”. Speaking literally, “Neighbors” is almost as good, if not better than all of those films. Partially because the film has such a strong story premise that mostly anyone can relate to. While the film’s box office success will be propelled by women fleeing to see Zac Efron with his shirt off 85% of the film. I commend the actor, and truly felt him as a comedian. (This being Efron’s first “real” comedic role, well.. if you count ‘That Awkward Moment”). As with most Rogen-esq films, the writing is top notch. Never does it cease to amaze me, that since “The 40 Year Old Virgin” these descendants of the great Judd Apatow are eerily consistent with every film they put out. The film, however, is nothing without this impeccable cast. Lead by Seth Rogen, but the real show stealer must belong to, Rose Byrne as the loveable, yet manipulative wife. While her character is not stereotypical in any way, I felt the role was tailor made just for her. There is also some good supporting work as well from MADTV alum, Ike Barinholtz. And fan favorites Christopher-Mintz Plasse and Dave Franco. The film comes on strong a few times, but the story progress nicely. “Neighbors” also transitions well between some hefty raunchy and lude R-rated behavior, to a more sentimental approach about friendship. “Neighbors” on a grander scale as a whole works diligently in the path it’s headed. It caters to it’s young crowd of college students, but also makes it worthwhile for older adults as well. There were moments in this film when I could not see the screen, because, I was laughing too hard. The film easily balances it’s themes, inappropriate humor and value perfectly. Never settling for second hand jokes, the film that has enough quotes to last the summer. Sure there are escalated times of when you may not be laughing enough. However, all the stars are evenly matched and the film no question earns my good graces, as well as, the hefty R-rating bestowed upon it. B+ By: Nate Adams Directed By: Nicholas Stoller Rated: R Run-Time: 93 mins Studio: Universal Pictures Release Date: May 9th 2014 Thanks For Stopping By.

Yes folks it is indeed that time of the year..again. Where does the year go?. We can all start to smell the freshly popped popcorn in movie theaters, we are starting to wear shorts (well maybe if you don't live in Michigan) right now it is a cool 50 degrees. I digress, I'm referring to the opening of the summer movie going season, and this year's olympian taking the helm is "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" and kicks off the summer in a sporting fashion. Sure it does not live up to "Iron Man 3" or "The Avengers". However, in the realm of the Spider-Man universe. Marc Webb has enough emotional connectivity to subdue an audience in a trance, With the stunning growth of Spider-Man himself, Andrew Garfield and on screen girlfriend, Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone). Aside from the original "Spider-Man 2" directed by Sam Rami. This fun, and family friendly adventure is most notably the web slinger's best adventure yet. The tagline itself declares "His biggest battle..begins" and to that I say, indeed it has. A few years have passed since we saw "Spider-Man" on screen, and a lot of things have changed. Peter Parker is battling some inner demons. Dealing with the guilt of dating Gwen, after he promised her father (as Spider-Man) he would leave her out of it his life. Upon graduating high school the two are forced to make some tough decisions. Though that does not stop Max Dillon (Jamie Foxx) a pencil pusher, who everyone ignores, from falling in a vault of electric shock eels and be zap to smithereens. Causing him to become a forced to be reckoned with. "Don't you ****'s Electro". We also get introduced to an ACTUAL Green Goblin, in the form of Dane DeHaan, forcing Peter Parker to reconcile and understand the consequences of his own actions, even if that means hurting the people he loves most. At the same time finding the undiscovered truth about his parents. I should probably admit now, I was not a huge fan of the reboot "The Amazing Spider-Man" I just don't think I was ready for a reboot yet, and I felt the original "Spider-Man" accomplished more with characters. Plus, with that being said, you knew what was going to happen. Not to mention that the villain was bogus .. I mean The Lizard?! .. give me a break. Needless to say, Marc Webb has fixed those issues, but inclines new ones. It's very clear that Andrew Garfield has come into the role of Peter Parker, and you can clearly feel that within the opening scenes, and it's just a treat to watch. The on-screen romance between Parker and Stacey was one of the best in recent memory. Sally Field also returns as the wonderful Aunt May. In addition, Marc Webb takes things a bit too far. There were so many characters to keep up with (I thought) and the balance was just not there. I think Electro had fifteen minutes of actual screentime and two battles. Granted, those battles were slick, cool and engaging. I just wanted a little bit more of that blue looking smurf guy. "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" was trying to make the audience feel empathy and to be sappy. The theme of the film is resounding throughout, about facing your fears and dealing with life (something I can appreciate). It's just hard to take it seriously when the film tries to cater to a younger audience, instead of setting a tone throughout the whole film. Films like "The Dark Knight Rises" or last month's "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" which solidified it's tone and never changed. "Spider-Man 2" distinctly goes back and forth and at times get's confusing. Of course, what is a good Spider-Man film without it's villains. The resurrection of the Green Goblin is a sweet one. A big thank you goes out to Dane DeHaan for reinventing this character to groundbreakingly new heights. A way that James Franco or Willem Dafoe could never dream off. Was Jamie Foxx the best choice to play Electro? Sure why not. Was I particularly moved by his performance? not entirely. The character is fun but, if speaking literally, anyone can play it. The battle sequences themselves, were impressive. I screened the film in IMAX 3D and trust me what an experience it was. My heart was probably about to beat out of my chest in the film's climactic **** visual effects have improved vastly, since the last adventure. You can tell the crew had a much bigger budget to cater with. Usually, the summer movie going season is a fun time. Studios release their big tent poles and never hold back. The summer is already off to a great start. "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" is a blast, and probably the best adventure we have seen the masked crusader in. Marc Webb has some nice stylized sequences that will make any fanboy happy. Not to mention any casual movie-goer. I will probably see this film again for it's fun energetic pace. The two and half hour run-time just flies by. I had some high expectations heading into this film. I mean if you're going to kick of the summer, you better do it right. Once again, Marvel and their ever expanding world of characters, never disappoint. "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" has brought new life into this franchise, and I can't wait to see what the future holds for these characters. B By: Nate Adams Directed By: Marc Webb Rated: PG13 Run-Time: 142 mins Studio: Sony Release Date: May 2nd 2014 Thanks For Stopping Buy.

Even if we saw this movie a few years ago entitled "District B13" an interesting indie film that introduced the world (in a small portion) to the depth and creativity that parkour stunts captivate. So where does that leave us?... ah yes.. District B13 dubbed in French is actually called.. you guessed it, Brick Mansions Obviously that stakes are different on this film for a number of reasons. The most notable, is that this is the final completed role of the late, Paul Walker before his tragic death in an automobile accident last November. Bittersweet is not the word I would use, more like, sad and empathy. Paul Walker does turn in a more than humble performance and his stunts are top notch. "Brick Mansions" is a blast to watch, from start to it's speedy quick finish. While the film requires a multitude of suspended disbelief, as most action films of this caliber do. Aside from some poorly dubbed lines from French co-star, and co-founder of Parkour David Belle, and a more laughable and cheesy performance from rapper, RZA. This is the more impressive Luc Besson adaptation to come along in a while. Mainly due in part to the devoted dedication of this crew and the cool and hip stunts. In a dystopian Detroit, there are abandoned Brick Mansions, left from a better times, but now house only the most notorious and ruthless criminals Unable to control the crime spree, the city sanctioned off the town with huge barricades and secluded them from the rest of the world. Undercover narcotics cop, Damian Collier (Walker) every day is a struggle against corruption and for Lino (Belle) is just to survive. The pair unlikely cross paths in a battle to take down kingpin Tremaine Alexander (RZA). As stated above the film is a remake of the 2004 film "District B13" and quite honestly if you watch that film, you will be surprised how eerily similar the films are. I had a few quarrels with the film's nonchalant plot, (if there was any). French Director,Camille Delamarre choppy edits the film to lengths where you barely understand what's happening. Some of the artistic choices were muffled on a path of obscurity. Aside from Paul Walker, the cast is filled with, what could have been, actors reading their lines off a billboard. I have the utmost respect for David Belle, I mean the guy is 44 years old and YOU should see some of the stuff he does in this film, amazing. Aside from the talent he brings in that aspect, I could barely understand him. All of Belle's lines were either dubbed or whispers, and I consistently scratched my head and asked what he was saying. The visual texture of the scenery was impressive for a low budget film. The cast looked like they had a fun time making the film. Aside from the poor editing, tasteless performances and poorly dubbed lines. "Brick Mansions" gets a subtle pass on this end. A highly enjoyable escapade on the front lines of action. Nobody could say the stunts in this film are boring, cause their not. The cast is likable enough to merit the flaws. I enjoyed the quick 89 min run-time, that further add to the intensity of the film. Whatever resemblance of a plot there was, and the cheesy one liners you only get with an action film of this level. However, on the Luc Besson scale this is a significant improvement. (His movies usually tend to disappoint; see "3 Days To Kill", "Lockout" , "Taken 2" and "The Family") I only wish Paul Walker could be here to see his work completed, he is so full of life in this film and it's so tragic we lost him to soon. The film does a nice tribute at the end of the film, which brought my crowded theater to roaring applause. Just for Walker, you have to see this film. B By: Nate Adams Directed By: Camille Delamarre Rated: PG13 Run-Time: 89 mins Release Date: April 25th 2014 Studio: Relativity Media Thanks For Stopping Buy.

A few weeks ago, I attended an early screening of the new Johnny Depp film "Transcendence" and was sworn to secrecy, until now. To a point, the logic and empirical formula of how technology relays information is powerful. We have all asked ourselves the questions of our downfall. These questions are never really asked in the film, but provide an intriguing look at a movie we have seen about three dozen times. Whether it's "The Lawnmower Man" or "I Robot", when it comes down to the nitty gritty. Aside from the great cinematography and the visual authenticity, that first-time director Wally Pfister brings to the table. The film "Transcendence" is nothing special. Johnny Depp turns in a mockery of a performance, the man is scrutinizing and scowling on a computer screen the whole movie. Hardly ever do we actually see him move around. The material is muddled and sloppy at best. I find it hard to ask the tough bearing questions, if you have no idea what's going on. Not only that, but "Transcendence" moves at about a snail pace. Running a much longer than needed 130 mins, and the build up to the finale is nothing you really care about. "Yesterday, Dr Will Caster, was only human" reads the gigantic poster. Will Caster (Depp) is a hardcore researcher in the field of artificial intelligence. Working diligently to create a stable machine that can combine human emotions with everything in the world. His highly controversial experiments have made him famous. But have also made him the target of extremist terrorist group known as "RIFT". After Will is attacked with a bullet laced with radiation poisoning. Will, inadvertently becomes his own participant into transcendence. Uploading his mind and subconscious into the world. HIs wife Evelyn (Rebecca Hall) and best friend Max Peters (Paul Bettany) don't begun to realize, that Will's hunger for knowledge, quickly becomes a thirst for power. Honestly, what could be better than Johnny Depp on the internet? everything. You're taking an astounding actor, with so much capability and talent, and sticking him on a computer screen for 80% of the film. That to me, is just pointless. The character of Will Caster is such a waste of potential. We could ideally learn so much more about him, which is also another downfall of this film. The relationship between Will Caster and his wife Evelyn are never really discussed upon. Sure, we know their feelings and deep love for each other, at times I found that hard to believe. The one bright spot has to be long time cinematographer Wally Pfister, whose work includes all the Dark Knight trilogy for Chris Nolan. The shots are pretty much all there, I mean the look and creativity is genuine. However, the elements of Sci-Fi drip into the overzealousness of an unbearable romantic subplot, and mild acting capabilities. "Transcendence" is a movie you want to like. A fictional film that is supposed to be an escapade that can provoke our thought process. Well sometimes it just doesn't happen. I tried to find some illuminating bright spots within the film's core. But deep down, it's all a convoluted mess. That needs to be unraveled before we can truly dissect it. Leading to an effortless conclusion that seemed rushed and uninspired. If you're a huge sci-fi junkie than perhaps you can understand the essence this film is trying to move. For any casual moviegoer, paying upwards of $10 a movie ticket, tread lightly. D+ By: Nate Adams Rated: PG13 Directed By: Wally Pfister Studio: Warner Bros. Release Date: April 18th 2014 Run-Time: 130 mins Thanks For Stopping Buy.

Now I will admit, much to my shame, **** an extent, I did enjoy (moderately) last year's sleeper hit parody, "A Haunted House" from creator Marlon Waynes. For one, I saw the film initially with my two best friends, and believe me when you are with your friends anything can seem hilarious. Upon a second viewing at home, well.. let's just say, I wasn't as fond the second time around. Now just a little over a year later, **** a million years would think that this crew would see a sequel. I mean we're standing here begging from a sequel to "The Incredibles". Nope we get "A Haunted House 2" and after seeing this film, I have learned one thing.. they will let anyone make a movie. The original "Haunted House" seemed fresh and actually different, a rare parody that only works and connects on certain occasions. Well these filmmakers have lost all their credibility (whatever that was) by plundering over a trash sequel that is loose, boring, and just plain obnoxious. I understand that a film like this is supposed to be goofy, dorky and dumb. "A Haunted House 2" just takes the word "stupid' to a different dimension. While there are just some things you can't unsee. The film picks up essentially where the original film left off. Malcolm Johnson (Waynes) lives his possessed girlfriend in the side of a ditch, and one year later begins to start his new life. Where, upon moving into his new home, the strange incidents that occurred before, start happening again. Following a send up of recent cult hits like "The Conjuring" "The Possession", and "Sinister". First off, the running gag of sexually molesting a rag doll can honestly go so far. Yeah sure it worked in the first one with some stuffed animals. Other than a mental image you're never going to forget, and some nightmares, nothing is really there. I swear Marlon Wayans was profusely sweating the entire duration of the film, not to mention he was constantly screaming at the camera. All of the lines looked like they were being read off a teleprompter. I felt like I had been enucleated with a drill and hammer after seeing this film, I needed an aspirin upon exiting the theater. Yikes!. The visual effects themselves were hokey at best. The film was produced for a miniscule budget of only $3 million bucks, and the film was left wide open for a third outing....I can only hope that doesn't happen. Aside from a brief laugh here and there, the writers take washed up jokes that we're hung high and dry in the predecessor, and recycle old material, not only does it never work, the audience is left sitting there wondering what an abysmal waste of time the movie is. Did we really insist on a sequel to "A Haunted House" heavens no, and when movies like "A Haunted House 2" are released that's when we know why. I respect the whole Wayne's clan, there are some funny guys. The first two Scary Movies were respectable in their own way, and like I stated above. I enjoyed the first "Haunted House". I just don't think a sequel was necessary. Not only that "Haunted House 2" is nowhere on the levels of it's predecessor.. In order for a spoof to be funny, it needs to know the limitations of it's own boundaries. "A Haunted House 2" may stick to the guns, but I just don't know why Hollywood is punishing us. Movies or sequels like this, make me question what movies are being released. Folks. do me a favor, save your money, and don't watch the overly obsessive, mediocre and one-two punch to the gut film. "A Haunted House 2" is a dramatic waste of your time. D- By: Nate Adams Directed By: Micheal Tiddes Studio: Open Road Films Release Date: April 18th 2014 Run-Time: 87 mins Thanks For Stopping Buy.

First, and foremost I can't even begin to delve into this miraculous piece of filmmaking without first, thinking it's director. While my sheer words, simply can't due the film any justice whatsoever. Wes Anderson, the creative mind behind the classics such as; "The Royal Tenenbaums", "Rushmore", "The Life Aquatic: With Steve Zissou" and last years amazing "Moonrise Kingdom. Anderson also directed the great kid flick "The Fantastic Mr. Fox". All of Wes Anderson films feature a zany, wacky, and fun energetic appeal, that not only make them insanely hilarious; but, unforgettable. His latest, "The Grand Budapest Hotel" is quite possibly his greatest achievement. The writing is simply put, terrific. There is of course the grand ole Anderson appeal, however, this film is more sharp and on target every step of the way. The success can also be attributed in part to the incredible cast of characters. Ralph Fiennes undoubtedly steals the show portraying Monsieur Gustave H, a loyal concierge of the "Grand Budapest". But I also have a feeling that audiences will be shocked by the real and authentic performance, that is turned in by newcomer Tony Revolori. This day and age in cinema were not usually graced with the pleasure of originality, in fact it's rather come and gone. Thanks to Anderson, and his creative ingenuity, chances are you're not just going to be laughing hysterically (and trust me, when I say, YOU will) but feel a sympathetic story of love, jealousy, rage, and betrayal. "The Grand Budapest Hotel" basically has something, for everyone. The story (written by sir, Wes Anderson himself) takes place across the span of a few different time periods, split up into several parts. In the present the audience meets Zero Moustfa (F. Murray Abraham) the new owner of the Grand Budapest, who recalls his life as an infamous lobby boy, under the strict direction of notorious concierge, Monsieur Gustave H. Rewinding back to 1932, Gustave (Ralph Fiennes) is a gigalo, known for his endeavours with older women. After his most personal client, Madame D (Tilda Swinton) mysterious dies at the age of 84. Thus, in her will, leaving a priceless painting known only as "Boy With Apple" to sir Gustave H himself. Causing a spiral of events, framing the innocent man. However, with the help of his loyal sidekick, Zero. Will prove his innocence, once and for all. Speaking on behalf of the film's set design earlier. There is so much little, attention to detail, down to the last wall fixture. Chances are, moviegoers will not see a set like this one. Taking into account Wes Anderson's, corky cinematography, at the same time it has the look, and feel of an old fashion murder mystery caper. However, Anderson still leaves his watermark, in his inclusive character development, and vigorous storytelling capability. In other words, the film is not as spectacular without it's extremely talented band of actors. Ralph Fiennes, idealistically steals almost every scene, of every line. The comedic timing, and his rapid fire of lines, is nothing short of perfection. He is extremely funny when he needs to be, but also, emotional when the story line demands it. Newcomer, Tony Revolori, get's his first shot at Hollywood, starring in his first film. I must say, after this performance, he has a bright career ahead of him. The list itself, goes on and on. All of your regular Anderson favorites make their appearances such as; Owen Wilson, Bill Murray, Jason Schwartzman, Edward Norton, and Willem Dafoe. Who each have their great moments, and will leave a huge smile on your face. When it boils down, and the film reaches it's conclusion and climax. The deepest intentions of the film's plot may skew over the head of most mainstream moviegoers. Anderson's whimsical natures is still in tact, for most of the duration. However, he does deteriorate a tad, and makes this film more relatable with his characters. "The Grand Budapest Hotel" is like a well oiled machine. An assembly line, making the perfect movie. Everything is exactly in place, as it should be. Not to mention, extremely funny. In a new age, where sequels, reboots and adaptations are being jammed down audience's throats. There is a silver lining, and his name is Wes Anderson. Most people seem to be afraid to venture to their local cineplexes, as they should, paying upwards of $11 a ticket. The Grand Budapest, is one of possibly three movies a year, that is cinematic in all its aspects, and just amazing. Something that is extremely thought-provoking, serious, and has a message. I, myself was deeply moved by the inner connections with our characters. This simply goes without saying, "Grand Budapest Hotel" is easily the best film I have so far, seen this year. A+ By: Nate Adams Directed By: Wes Anderson Rated: R Run-Time: 100 mins Release Date: March 28th (Wide) Studio: Fox Searchlight Thanks For Stopping Buy.

Typically, it is usually hard for a sequel to match the high velocity levels, and flare of its predecessor. And, hardly is there a sequel that can OUTDO it's original counterpart. Well folks, I just saw "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" and it subsequently does just that. Marvel has proven time, and time again, they are a forced to be reckoned with. This sequel solidifies them, as the most prestigious studio making films today. "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" is more than just a superhero film, it's a harrowing plot line, rich and engaging from start to finish. Inflamed by the testosterone goodness that make us all cringe with excitement. "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" is just something, we don't see, as moviegoers, very often. Chris Evans, is back in full action as the Captain, Steve Rogers. Now forced to reconcile in the real word, at the hands of the shield agency, working for Nick Fury (Samuel Jackson). After the events in New York, the Captain has taken a new lead. However, after a run in with a being they call "The Winter Soldier" leaving Fury close to death. Things are not as them seem. Framing the Captain, and the Shield organization. Along the way enlisting in the help of Sam Wilson, a.k.a The Falcon (Anthony Mackie), to defend the justice they once stood for... did my best to describe the film without any spoilers!. First off, I simply congratulate directors, Antony and Joe Russo for their mesmerizing work on this film. Get this, their previous work was mainly on the NBC comedy "Community" . So their transition to the big screen was fantastic. However, the true magic is within the screenplay written by; Christopher Markus & Stephen McFeely. The writers not only attribute and acknowledge the whole superhero plot. They also indulge a different style, not privy to the confines of natural superhero films. Adding in a whole subtext on the Shield organization, that makes it all the more entertaining. There is also a brief scene with Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell) now 98 years old, that was very deep and touching. I was so happy than we got to delve more into the past of Steve Rogers, and learn about the captain. The subplots were so intentional, and perfect in every sense. Most sequels tend to get sloppy or lazy upon arrival. Hence, "Iron Man 2" or "Spider Man 3". As far as the Marvel cinematic universe goes. Aside from "The Avengers" (which is tough to consider, it could be it's own category) The Winter Soldier is ideally, their best work yet. Thanks to what I refer to as the "dream time". Brothers, Anthony and Joe Russo, have a slick design, and flawless action sequences, some of the best in recent memory. Not to mention a grand finale, that will have you biting your nails, but, on the verge of cheering for more. Continuing on, the action sequences were very well shot, the hand to hand combat sequences were, timed perfectly, and entertaining as hell. The car chase sequences were perhaps even better. The Russo brothers, know how to conquer some death defying sequences, but also can take your breath away. They tried to make a political espionage thriller, with superheros, and it worked on all cylinders. There should be no surprise that I was a ginormous fan of the first film "Captain America: The First Avenger" mainly because I felt I could relate with the character, and well I did. I also, am extremely biased in terms that Captain America is my favorite out of the "Avenger" bunch. Just because he is a real honest human being, which is partially why I loved this move so much. Because, the writers made Steve Rogers a human again, more than just a hero with a shield. A man with morals, and understanding. They also gave him so much range to grow, they made this film so much better than it needed to be, and in the process, has set the bar astronomically high for every superhero film to come, so needless to say, you better watch out. Well played Marvel, well played. A By: Nate Adams Directed By: Anthony and Joe Russo Rated: PG13 Run-Time: 140 mins Studio: Marvel Release Date: April 4th 2014 Thanks For Stopping Buy.

"Well acted, well directed and an amazing concept and story. Now You See Me is the freshest, coolest and one of the most original flicks to come along this year. Filled with surprises at every corner and a stunning final act, its a film you have to see." A-

"Aside from the films tacky ending, After Earth is not going to wow you with its visuals or make your jaw-drop, but if you can get past some of the performances you may enjoy this sci-fi adventure, this is M. Night's first good movie in about a decade." C

"Epic dares to be original, unique and well creative, but its not. It offers very little to most adults while only "truly" entertaining the children. Its Blue Sky animations worst movie to date and on the low end of the animation spectrum, I expected more" C

"The script is dull and lifeless, but the action, the stunts and more importantly the cars are stupendous. It impresses me so much that after so long the Fast and Furious films never cease to amaze me. Another successful entry in the long-run franchise." B+

"What should have been a finale instead felt like a waste. The Hangover Part III, dares to try something new and actually falls flat, with no motivation, no interests, and more importantly, no comedy. it's a lukewarm finale to our beloved wolf-pack." ..D+

"Warp speed ahead and delve into the realm that is Star Trek: Into Darkness. A great spectacle and terrific film. Although not as 'good' as the original. 'Into Darkness' is still a full-blown, exciting, dark and edgy 3D motion picture experience." A

"The Great Gatsby was not as "great" as it should have been, but features some of the most dazzling visuals, outstanding soundtrack and just breathtaking performances across the board. Baz Luhrman has given the classic novel the film adaptation it deserves" B+

"Iron Man 3 is bold, daring, brilliant and easily the best adventure yet. Darker in tone and more prone to high-tech, this sequel is by far the most impressive Marvel film i have ever seen and possibly one of the best superhero films ever to be released." A-

"Talk about a bizarre true story. Pain & Gain is probably one of Micheal Bay's most visceral piece of filmmaking but not his best. It has its moments of humor sadly Pain & Gain eventually falls prey to it's different, weird and vibrant style of direction." B-

"Oblivion is no question a visual marvel and features Tom Cruise at his best. But sadly that gets clouded by its overwhelming and confusing plot while all the same running too long and it fails to capture or retain your attention after about the hour mark." C

"42 is a mesmerizing, heartfelt and emotional film that highlights a true legend in his glory days, Its a roaring crowd pleaser. Played flawlessly by Chadwick Bosemen. 42 is one of the best Baseball films i have ever had the pleasure of seeing."

"Without a doubt the most sadistic, gruesome and just plain terrifying film i have had the pleasure of seeing. The Evil Dead is gory, disgusting & pays homage to the original while all the same giving the fans the blood and carnage we have been waiting for" A

"The Croods is a HUGE achievement for Dreamworks Animation. Visually appealing with a heart-warming story that at times is emotional and very clever. Featuring a nice voice cast, a film that could have been awful, turned out to be quite the opposite." ..B

"What was actually an intriguing premise and somewhat clever story-line, gets butchered admist on the path for destruction. The Host, fails in conjuring any sense of emotion and depth and instead makes you wanna take an aspirin because your head hurts." F

"While it does leave a bittersweet taste in your mouth when your leaving the theater. This "sequel" is more of a reboot than anything. Introducing some new characters along the way. John M. Cho attempt at remaking the beloved GI Joe series was accomplished" B-

"Olympus Has Fallen" is a taunt, exciting, edgy and just a flat out terrific action movie. More along the lines of a Die Hard for this generation, Antoine Fuqua has created one truly kick ass film, Olympus does not fall, in fact its quite the opposite.".. A-

"The Call is a somewhat intense, smart, but predictable edgy thriller. That actually makes you cringe a little bit. Although not unique or original in any way shape or form and its insanely forgettable. For the most part its that fun guilty pleasure." B

"While not on par with any of the actors previous attempts at hardcore comedy. The Incredible Burt Wonderstone is a heart-felt and funny flick that is easily forgettable and truthfully lacks much of the razzle-dazzle the film needed in order to be great." B-

"To say "OZ" is powerful is pushing its boundaries a little bit, but great is a fair assessment. Oz is a visually stunning spectacle with enough dazzle and humor to make up for its overbearing run-time, middling performances and modest conclusion." B

"While its not going to be an "instant classic" nor is up to par with Project X. But 21 & Over is not afraid to take some jokes to a new level, while the overall vibe is silly & pointless. This is a night that deep down we all dream of living at some point" ..B+

"Snitch is no-where near originality or up to par with the Rock's other action flicks, but entertaining enough to the point where if you can get past the flaws, there are many, you may actually find enjoyment out of this easily forgettable action film." B

"While its barley worthy enough to call itself a "Die Hard" its still not as horrible as it could of been. It suffers from a middling plot, uninspired chemistry & a not-so intriguing premise overall. But nevertheless it was nice seeing John McClane again." C

"Side Effects is a truly engrossing, edgy, seductive film and proves just how good Steven Soderbergh really is. Exciting and filled with unpredictable twist and featuring outstanding performances, Side Effects is the first great film of the 2013 year." A-

"While Identity Thief has some memorable and surprising laughs, the first half of the film is quite funny and promises well, but the second half was lacking in many areas. Batemen and McCarthy do there best, Overall this film is worth seeing at least once" B-

"Movie 43 is an utter terrible disgrace and lame excuse to call itself a "feature film" this film is so awful you should pay not to see it. All the acting talents are simply wasted on a film that should not have even made it to theaters in the first place." F