Movie Review: Divergent

My rating: 2.75/5

From Amazon: "Divergent is set in a world where people are divided into distinct factions based on human virtues. Tris Prior (Shailene Woodley) is warned she is Divergent and will never fit into any one group. When she discovers a conspiracy by a faction leader (Kate Winslet) to destroy all Divergents, Tris must learn to trust in the mysterious Four (Theo James) and together they must find out what makes being Divergent so dangerous before it's too late."

Long story short: I got bored.  Maybe it was because the movie followed what I remembered of the book well enough that I just wasn't surprised by anything, or maybe it was too slow.  Or both.  I do remember the book feeling very exciting, and the movie somehow doesn't bring that across. 

Unfortunately it tries to liven things up by mimicking Twilight's style of adding pop music to scenes that really don't need it (e.g., eating in the cafeteria). It was distracting to such a point that I'd turn to my husband and ask if one of the characters had turned on a radio and I missed it.  And Tris just doesn't come across as the strong person the book portrays her as. 

Seeing the movie did make the book's story seem more juvenile to me too and reaffirmed the fact that I don't care to read the rest of the series: She's special; she can't be put in a category like these other dopes! Dauntless is crazy-- they get tattoos and zipline! etc. 

I can't say the acting was terrible (not great, but not terrible), and there was nothing about it that was egregious, so I give it a 2.75. I can't quite bring myself to give it a full 3. 

Movie Review: The Giver

My rating: 3/5

From IMDB: "In a seemingly perfect community, without war, pain, suffering, differences or choice, a young boy is chosen to learn from an elderly man about the true pain and pleasure of the 'real' world."

I'll go ahead and out myself as holding The Giver on a very high pedestal as my favorite book of all time.  However, I generally don't care if movies don't precisely follow their book origins; I actually like differences, especially when a visual or aural style is used that couldn't really be expressed effectively in written word (or vice versa, if some faculty was used well in a book but couldn't possibly be expressed in a visual/auditory medium). So long as they make sense. 

This movie follows the book pretty well, but to a fault in my opinion. They could and should have left things out to leave more time for memory-sharing (which I thought was far too short before Jonas freaked). The whole thing in general also felt rushed, probably to try and pack as much as they could from the book into it, and there was far too much "telling-not-showing."  Every part that showed the audience what was going on rather than telling us was great.  For example, the ceremony, with all the different ages that being celebrated for different things, and Jonas's number being skipped.  That part was great.  Other parts though felt like unnecessary monologue and hand-holding, and this led to cheesiness that I never got from the book and seriously detracted from the movie.

Acting was very good, I don't have any complaints there.  I do wish they'd included the fact that "giving" a memory in turn makes the original memory-holder lose that memory, or at least only retain a very faded version of it.  This isn't addressed, and I feel like it was important and would have made Jonas's giving Gabe some of his memories more compelling and sacrificial than they seemed in the movie.  I also wish they'd shown more of the disdain for certain occupations, especially "birthmother;" the only time this is mentioned is when Asher hopes he doesn't get a waste-management position.  Personally I think it's important to show that, even though this is a "perfect" society, people still don't treat everyone exactly as equals.  

And then towards the end... did anybody else worry (like, a lot) about Gabe being seriously injured after the jump off the cliff on the motorcycle, and the fact that sometimes Jonas is carrying him only by his head? :-/

Overall though, it was still entertaining, and I did love how they showed memories in rapid succession sometimes, in extremely bright colors.  I also liked how they handled the color transition.  But a lot of things could have been done better I think, so I'll leave this at a solid 3.  Warning to those who are very squeamish: true to the book, there is a scene where a baby is put to death.  It's rightfully shocking, and makes this probably not a film for young kids.

Movie Review: Iron Man 3

My rating: 4/5. 

Succinctly from IMDB.com: "When Tony Stark's world is torn apart by a formidable terrorist called the Mandarin, he starts an odyssey of rebuilding and retribution."

This was an exciting, entertaining movie, even with the one small complaint I have.  Unfortunately I can't fully describe that complaint without giving away a huge plot point, but I will say that the cheesiness of the Mandarin's television interruptions were never redeemed for me later in the movie, even though they were for my husband. I still found them cheesy and unbelievable, while he found them to make sense.  So, take from that what you will.  Otherwise I really enjoyed the movie, especially the exchanges between Stark and the boy. Loved that part.  I also appreciate when women are, at least sometimes, able to save themselves. We really don't see that often enough.  

Movie Review: The Hobbit, An Unexpected Journey

My rating: 3.5/5.

From Amazon: "The adventure follows the journey of title character Bilbo Baggins, who is swept into an epic quest to reclaim the lost Dwarf Kingdom of Erebor from the fearsome dragon Smaug. Approached out of the blue by the wizard Gandalf the Grey, Bilbo finds himself joining a company of thirteen dwarves led by the legendary warrior, Thorin Oakenshield. Their journey will take them into the Wild; through treacherous lands swarming with Goblins and Orcs, deadly Wargs and Sorcerers. Although their goal lies to the East and the wastelands of the Lonely Mountain, first they must escape the goblin tunnels, where Bilbo meets the creature that will change his life forever Gollum. Here, alone with Gollum, on the shores of an underground lake, the unassuming Bilbo Baggins not only discovers depths of ingenuity and courage that surprise even him, he also gains possession of Gollum's "precious" ring that holds unexpected and useful qualities A simple, gold ring that is tied to the fate of all Middle-earth in ways Bilbo cannot begin to know."

I had heard that this movie wasn't great, mainly because it tried to be both a kiddie movie and an adult-fan movie at the same time and couldn't pull it off.  I would agree to an extent, especially in the beginning. But I feel like by the second half of the movie, it had decided to be an adult-fan movie (especially judging by the gore; I don't recommend this for kids at all), and I liked it.  I'm a pretty big fan of the Lord of the Rings trilogy and didn't like this movie quite as well, but I still liked it and think it's a good watch for any LotR fan. 

Movie Review: Cloud Atlas

My rating: 2/5. 

From Amazon: "Future. Present. Past. Everything is connected. An exploration of how the actions of individual lives impact one another in the past, present and future, as one soul is shaped from a killer into a hero, and an act of kindness ripples across centuries to inspire a revolution.The story is a time-shifting weave of six interlinking narratives, with diverse settings from the savagery of a Pacific Island in the 1850s to a dystopian Korea of the near future. Based on the New York Times best-selling novel Cloud Atlas written by David Mitchell."

I have not read the book, but judging by book reviews and previews for the movie, I really expected to like this. Instead, all I found it to be was a purposefully confused, often boring mess. Good storytelling doesn't have to force itself to be obtuse, and it needs to convey a point. This movie seemed mostly pointless.  It was also unnecessarily gory a few times, and I never appreciate that.  

I will give it credit for its makeup though.  Holy cow; a few times it was quite a while before I realized which (famous) actor was behind a particular character's makeup job.  But that's about all I can give it credit for.

Movie Review: Ender's Game

My rating: 4/5

From Amazon: "In the near future, a hostile alien race has attacked Earth. If not for the legendary heroics of International Fleet Commander Mazer Rackham (Ben Kingsley), all would have been lost. In preparation for the next attack, the highly esteemed Colonel Hyrum Graff (Harrison Ford) and the International Military are training the best and brightest young children to find the future Mazer. Ender Wiggin (Asa Butterfield), a shy, but strategically brilliant boy is pulled out of his school to join the elite"

I appreciated how well this movie followed the book. The acting was awesome, especially by Asa Butterfield; he was absolutely perfect for the role of Ender and I'm honestly excited to see what roles he plays in future movies. However, the only role in the movie I didn't entirely appreciate was Petra. The actor playing her was perfectly fine, but for some reason they decided to hint at her being a love interest for Ender almost every time they interacted, when in the book she was nothing more than a sister-like friend. For goodness sakes, she's a tough-as-nails child soldier and she appears on Ender's communicator near the end of the movie in an almost-seductive pose in her pj's with her braided hair pulled over her shoulder. Why??

Other than that though, I think I loved every character. I wish there had been more of Valentine and Peter and their political takeover back home, but I understand how that would be hard to put into a movie, especially one that's already almost 2 hours long. Overall, great movie, would recommend to any sci-fi fan.

Movie Review: World War Z

My rating: 3.5/5

From Amazon: "A former UN investigator is thrust into the middle of trying to stop what could be the end of the world. Worldwide destruction sends him around the globe seeking clues about what they are fighting and what it will take to defeat it, as he tries to save the lives of billions of strangers, as well as his own beloved family."

I actually didn't think this movie was half bad, even though I'd heard it was terrible.  It sort of followed the book, though not exactly, but that really didn't bother me at all.  I didn't notice any bad acting, and Brad Pitt was great for the main character. It was intense, and it did intensity well; but when it tried to be emotional, it didn't quite get there, and I'm not really sure why. In fact the only thing that almost choked me up, a little, was the police officer who ran into the looted grocery store, seemingly because of the gunfire... and ignores the firefight to fill a bag with baby food.  I can't give the movie a very high rating though only because the level of coincidence in the events is staggeringly unrealistic. We literally laughed at these moments.  But other than that, it is an enjoyable movie.

Movie Review: The Great Gatsby

My rating: 4/5

From Amazon: "Aspiring writer Nick Carraway goes to New York City at the height of the Roaring Twenties and is drawn into the world of the super-rich and the mysterious millionaire, Jay Gatsby."

Because this movie was made by Baz Luhrmann (Moulin Rouge, Australia, Romeo+Juliet), I had high expectations. And a lot of those expectations were met: beautiful cinematography, a good amount of music, a nice tragic love story, over-the-top but well-done drama. Unfortunately though, it got pretty slow towards the end, and the music wasn't nearly as integrated as it could (and I think should) have been.  I'm not sure an entire song was ever played through, and it wasn't nearly as important to the plot of the movie as it was, for example, in Moulin Rouge. I was disappointed. But as for the rest of the movie, the acting was great and the story was great, and there's not much more you need for a high rating from me.

Movie Review: Warm Bodies

My rating: 3.5/5

From Amazon: "An unlikely romance between a beautiful human teen and a sensitive undead slacker sets off a chain of events with the power to transform the world."

After reading the book of the same name, this movie just didn't compare. Big surprise I suppose, as so many people say the same thing about so many books-turned-movies. But I really expected this to be at least almost as funny and dramatic and dark as the book, and it just didn't live up to expectations. It actually starts out good with some quick humor, but it very quickly dies down and the majority of the movie drags. Acting is mostly sub-par too, which does it no favors. If you're looking for something to pop in and have as background noise while you work on some homework, it's not terrible. If you're actually looking for Isaac Marion-level entertainment, read one of his books.

Movie Review: John Dies at the End

My rating: 4/5

From Amazon: "An otherworldly invasion is underway, and mankind needs a hero. What it gets instead is John and David, a pair of college dropouts who can barely hold down jobs."

This movie was unexpectedly great and hilarious. I had no clue what it was about before watching it (mainly because I haven't read the book, which I may go back and do now). I doubt I'd want to watch the movie again though, if only because the end sort of unraveled and was suddenly gory. Hence the 4/5.  But good on it for making me want to read the book; that's a rare thing for me.

Movie Review: Beautiful Creatures

My rating: 4/5

From Fandango.com: "Lena has just moved to the small, Southern town of Gatlin, where the only person who seems to understand her -- or dream of bigger places or ideas -- is a cute guy named Ethan Wate (Alden Ehrenreich), who recognizes her instantly from the cryptic dreams he's been having every night. Lena is an orphan, and she's come to stay with her mysterious uncle, Macon Ravenwood (Irons), the patriarch of her powerful family. Powerful, because The Ravenwood clan are Casters, born with powers that ordinary mortals don't have, like the ability to move objects, control the elements, and even step out of normal space and time to communicate only with each other. But just as Lena feels ready to open up to Ethan, she discovers that their love is in imminent danger, because when female Casters turn 16, their destiny as either good or evil is revealed. Unwilling to let her nature be dictated by forces outside her control, Lena and Ethan set out together to uncover the strange, secret lore of their families' intertwined histories dating back to the Civil War, and figure out how to grant Lena the power to choose her own destiny."

We weren't sure what to expect from this movie.  On the one hand, it looked like a Twilight knockoff with witches; but on the other, it had Jeremy Irons.  As it turned out, the movie was on the Jeremy Irons side.  I hate romance but loved the romance between the main characters.  They were both smart, weird, and just smarmy enough to make it totally enjoyable to watch.  The only reason I couldn't give it a full 5 was that it dragged towards the end quite a bit, and we didn't get as much of the smart-aleck quirkiness that we did in the first half of the movie.  Still, it was a great movie, and I'd really like to read the Caster Chronicles series now.

Movie Review: Oz the Great and Powerful

 

My rating: 3/5

I can't say this movie wasn't entertaining, and I enjoyed the witches' characters a lot. James Franco's Oz, though, was always kind of smarmy and really never changed, which made viewers want to dislike the main character throughout the entire movie.  It was also too long (2 hours 11 minutes) for no good reason. If editing had been tighter I would have rated it a little higher.  And if Oz had been likeable, it could have come close to a 5.  It's still worth seeing, but... it's not worth much. Rent it for cheap or borrow it from the library.

Movie Review: Life of Pi

My rating: 5/5

From Amazon: "After a cataclysmic shipwreck, an Indian boy named Pi finds himself stranded on a lifeboat with a ferocious Bengal tiger. Together, they face nature's majestic grandeur and fury on an epic journey of discovery."

This movie was every bit as beautiful,  visually and in narrative, as the previews made it out to be. Even beyond that.  This is now, without a doubt, one of my favorite movies.

I have not read the book, and in all honesty I may not now that I've seen the movie and know how it ends.  However, it must be an amazing story to read, judging by how beautiful and detailed the movie is.  It was a much deeper and much more serious story than I expected based on seeing the trailers, and the most fanciful story on a generally religious subject I've ever seen. It's culturally, philosophically, and religiously interesting, and I really want to see it again.

Movie Review: The Woman in Black

My rating: 4/5

Based on the book of the same name by Susan Hill (which I have not read), this movie is good-scary. Creepy-scary. The kind of scary I like and can't often find. It's not gory, and it only has a couple of cheap-ish, jump-out-of-your-seat scares.  And it's a really good story to which I hope they make a sequel.  (UPDATE: They're making a sequel for 2014!)

My husband and I rented this expecting it to be bad, to be quite honest. We hadn't heard much about it and figured it was because Daniel Radcliffe hadn't been able to pull out of Harry Potter-mode. In the very beginning, he actually is very Harry-ish when interacting with his character's son, and I almost wrote the movie off right then. But after that, he made me forget that he was Potter and I was glued to the TV.  The atmosphere is great (anything with possessed Victorian wind-up dolls creeps me right out), the acting is great (after those first few bumps), and it made for a believably scary story that entertained my socks off (which is a feat, considering how much I love wearing socks.)  Radcliffe made me believe his mourning and desperation without going over the top, and I absolutely loved the ending. I am super excited and can't wait for The Woman in Black: Angels of Death.

Movie Review: Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter

My rating: 4.75/5

From IMDB.com: "Abraham Lincoln, the 16th President of the United States, discovers vampires are planning to take over the United States. He makes it his mission to eliminate them."

Throw in horse-hurling vampires and President Lincoln kicking a decapitated head off a train like a soccer ball, and that pretty well sums it up. It isn't especially gory (I can't stomach movies that are), but enough so that everything is excitingly dangerous and death-defying.

Don't go into this movie expecting any kind of serious treatise on Lincoln, the American Civil War, or history.  Don't even expect a good treatment of vampires (though I do appreciate an anti-Twilight treatment), as the movie's explicit rules governing their behavior are broken (which is the main reason I didn't give this movie a straight 5/5; that and some pretty terrible acting in the very beginning). Do expect this movie to take itself so over-the-top serious, while surreptitiously realizing its own ridiculousness, that you burst into laughter on multiple occasions. Which, in my honest opinion, was done on purpose, and was done beautifully.

The best movies I can compare this to are the campy '80s vampire/horror flicks, like Fright Night and Lost Boys, that were goofy, scary, funny, and good, all at once. The martial arts-style fight scenes and the special effects here are much better though; jaw-droppingly so and physics be damned.

Rarely do I love a movie so much more than the book it's based on (see my review here). I have not been so entertained by a movie in a very long time.