The Expendables Review

If Inception was the most anticipated smartest film of the summer, then The Expendables was surely the dumbest most anticipated film of the summer; and was another film I saw the day after release but didn't review till now, thus continuing my "Week of Catching Up". Don't expect much...

There really isn't anything to say about this film's story or what it's about, because if you're like me and pretty much everyone else that went to see this movie, you're going into this expecting to see the greatest action movie cast of all time. You've got Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Terry Crews, Randy Couture (he puts an entire gym on your door, princess.), Mickey Rourke, Stone Cold Steve Austin, Eric Roberts, and cameos from Bruce Willis and the Governator himself, Arnold Schwarzenegger in his first film role in like... ever. With a group like that, you can't help but at least see what the hell happens when you get them together. If only Steven Seagal, Jean Claude Van Damme and Chuck Norris were in this, then it would've been perfect.

But if you do care about story, in this case what's wrong with you? But seriously, The Expendables are a group of hitmen? mercenaries? bounty hunters? bikers? pirates? To be honest, I was never really sure, but you're supposed to assume they're the good guys. And they go to some fictional dictatorship island and try and overthrow the corrupt government led by Eric Roberts (as The Master, derpderp). Basically though, the story was really second to none, and it was really about the characters and the action.

About that action... for a big budget action movie that was supposed to be an homage to the over the top action films of the 80s and 90s, there was a heck of a lot of CG'd blood and effects, and it really detracted from the feeling the movie was aiming for. For instance, the opening scene has the gang using laser sights on a group of Somali pirates, and you can clearly see that the lasers are a cheap After Effects effect, as they're opaque and much thicker than a laser should be; and that's right before a dude gets separated from his lower half, which looked to be done with traditional effects (plus CGI blood of course). It was just really disappointing because you'd think if they're going to go all out on an action movie at least use fake blood; computer blood just looks stupid and costs more.

Speaking of costs though: the cast. It's more than possible that the film's entire budget was spent on the cast, but that still won't excuse CGI blood. Despite the ensemble cast advertising, the film is really about Stallone and Statham's characters, with Jet Li getting a much lower third seat (short jokes). Crews and Couture's character are basically nonexistent for a bulk of the film, and Dolph Lundgren gets more screen-time than I expected.

The weirder part of the film was definitely Mickey Rourke's character, which looks like he filmed his parts during Iron Man 2's off time. What was weird was that in this incredibly over the top action film that had no brains whatsoever, Rourke does actual acting as the team's 'wise man' of sorts, and actually has a nearly 5 minute monologue about some girl killing herself. And, touching as it may be, it's an incredibly out of place scene for this movie and it's just like, "C'mon Mickey, what're you doing actually acting here? Blow some shit up like the other guys!". Then there's the Willis and Schwarzenegger scene, which if you saw the commercials for the film, that's all there is to see of the two of them; it was an amusing scene, but was spoiled very early on in promotions. So, as to why Willis even gets last billing is beyond me, but I had the same issue with Michael Caine in Inception.

Of course, I went into this film not expecting much substance in terms of acting or storytelling, so there wasn't anything to really be disappointed about there. But I was really turned off by the use of CGI blood, because it just makes the entire experience feel extremely cheap. It was great that all of the actors each got their moment in the spotlight, some more so than others, but I was a bit bothered that they never really felt like a team as the promotional materials would suggest. Watch this one with a group for an enjoyable time, but just don't expect in terms of substance (Mickey Rourke's moment aside).

Overall Score: 6.8/10

Iron Man 2 Review

It's here! The sequel to the surprise summer hit of 2008 and the sequel to the movie that could've been our first movie review but we didn't start movie reviews until slightly after I saw the film so... enough of that. But it should be worth mentioning, that opening weekend, in 2008, was the first and last time I saw Iron Man and if I had to judge that film at that time, I'd of given it an 8/10. It was a good movie, and told Stark's story well, and looked great, but I wasn't blown away. But what about the sequel?

Two years later, a brand new movie, with a chance to go beyond the origin story and into the original storyline realm, and it's all a bit of the same really. The biggest issue Iron Man 2 has is the biggest issue that a lot of sequels have (Spider-Man 3, the entire X-Men franchise, those awful Schumacher Batman films), fitting in way too many new stories and characters for one film. Sure, the inclusion of more characters is looked at as fan service, giving fans the chance to see their favorite characters on screen, but it really is more annoying because it just makes things muddy.

So what's the actual story then? Well, I'll try to do this as spoiler free as I can, but I'll fail, and it'll be just as messy as it is in the film. First off there's the story of the film's villain, Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke), who is made up just for the movie combining elements of Iron Man foes Crimson Dynamo and Whiplash/Blacklash. Vanko's motivation to kill Tony Stark because Stark's father deported Vanko's father to Siberia and gave him a miserable life. Then there's Tony's story, which is all about how he deals with the public image and perception of Iron Man now that he has revealed his identity and then how that effects his companions Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) and James Rhodes (Don Cheadle, who takes over for Terrance Howard from the first film).

But that's not all! Then there's the story of Justin Hammer, another wealthy inventor and arms-dealer, but just doesn't have the same edge that Tony Stark has, until he gets the right help. And there's also the little story of Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) and Natasha Romanoff a.k.a. Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) from S.H.I.E.L.D. who are monitoring Stark for the Avengers Initiative. Like I said, a lot, and that's without me even discussing the progression of the story, which I won't do, not after all that.

So, in terms of story, the film is a mess. Samuel L. Jackson is barely in the film despite what one would have thought from Iron Man 1's after-credits scene and all the ads, and the parts he is in are just him being his unintentionally hilarious self. And while I think Don Cheadle did a much better job than Terrance Howard as Rhodey, you barely see the character to even get any fealing for him, plus most of his scenes are in a suit. And Scarlett Johansson's Black Widow comes off as very boring, and lacks the character's Russian-ness, though she is visually appealing to say the least... Point being, all these characters are there, but they don't really do anything. If anything, the film should've really been about the rivalry between Tony Stark and his competitor Justin Hammer, which it was, but without all the fluff and extra characters that ended up getting more of a focus, because really, Sam Rockwell was the co-star here.

Everything else... the CGI was top-notch as usual, I really enjoyed how CG and real-life blended in really well in the first film so it was great to see that still in full effect. And there is a huge final battle scene near the end that animator Genndy Tartakovsky (Dexter's Laboratory, Samurai Jack) storyboarded and it surprisingly shows despite it being live action, definitely one of the highlights of the film. The music? I could have done without all the AC/DC and cheesy guitar-rock, but it was almost fitting for a semi-trashy film that can never tell you when it wants to be taken as a drama or a comedy. Speaking of which, was drunken Tony dancing in the Iron Man suit really necessary? Have we learned NOTHING from Spider-Man 3? C'mon...

Overall, the film isn't bad. If you liked the first film, I think you should see the second, just to see it. But don't expect to be blown away. And to the people that really like the first film... what the hell? Really? You thought Iron Man was that great, what movies have you been watching?

Overall Score: 7.8/10

81st Annual Oscar nominees

Well, the day has come, after a year full of outstanding films, the Academy has finally released its list of nominees for the 81st Annual Academy Awards, a.k.a. the Oscars.

81st Annual Academy Award Nominations

Now I cannot say I've seen all of these films, so this may seem very opinionated .. let's face it, it is. None the less, I'm just going to write my highlights/predictions.

Best Picture Slumdog Millionaire
Best Director Danny Boyle - Slumdog Millionaire
Best Actor Mickey Rourke - The Wrestler
Best Supporting Actor Heath Ledger - The Dark Knight
Best Original Screenplay WALL-E
Best Animated Feature WALL-E
Best Makeup Hellboy II: The Golden Army
Best Visual Effects Iron Man

Well, that's obviously not all the categories, but just ones I'd like to point out. Out of the Best Picture category, Slumdog was the only one I've seen, but it was brilliant, so that's why it's my pick; same reasoning for Best Director, Danny Boyle. For Best Actor, I don't think I need to repeat myself, as you can just see my review of The Wrestler. Now, Marrisa Tomei is nominated for Best Supporting Actress for her performance in The Wrestler, but as you can read from my review, I felt her character to be an unnecesary part of the film, and that's she's unlisted.

Now here's the nomination that's been on everyone's mind since July, Heath Ledger for Best Supporting Actor in The Dark Knight. Now, personally, I enjoyed his performance as the Joker, as did many others. But I can't help but feeling he wouldn't be nominated had he not passed away. So my feeling is, he's going to end up winning because it's his only chance to, but it may not feel as deserved to some.

Other highlights; Best Original Screenplay and Best Animated Feature definetly belong to WALL-E. Another film I've reviewed (twice even), WALL-E excells beyond any animated feature I've seen before, and even above some live action films; so any award it's nominated for it probably deserves. Lastly, two films not recognized in the big categories, but at least mentioned in the right places: Hellboy II for Best Makeup and Iron Man for Best Visual Effects.

So what do you think of my thoughts? Oh, really? Fine then. I can't be the only shocked by Robert Downey Jr's Best Supporting Actor nomination for Tropic Thunder; seriously, that really surprised me... in a bad way. None the less, The Curious Case of Benjaman Button (13), Slumdog Millionaire (10), The Dark Knight (8), Milk (8), and WALL-E (6) are in the top 5 for most nominations, so I'm sure we can expect to see them on the winners list at least a few times each.

The 81st Annual Academy Awards air February 22nd on ABC. See you then!

The Wrestler review

Last night I got the chance to see a film that's been getting a lot of people's attention, which is odd for a film of it's stature. And if you can't tell by the poster to the left, or the title of the article, I'm talking about Darren Aronofsky's latest film, The Wrestler.

The film centers around the daily life of professional wrestler, Randy "The Ram" Robinson (Mickey Rourke), who was a star in the eighties, but now, twenty years later, works in a grocery store and does small time fights on the weekends. Randy lives alone in a trailer park for which he can't pay the rent, he hasn't spoken with his daughter in years, and has also taken liking to a stripper, Cassidy (Marisa Tomei). In short, he's just not the man he used to be.

After a local match, a promoter reminds Randy that the twentieth anniversary of his fight with the Ayatollah at Madison Square Garden is coming up, and suggests the two have a rematch. Seeing it as a chance to reboot his career, Randy agrees. However, after a hardcore match, Randy succumbs to a heart attack and the doctor suggests he quit wrestling forever. But all is not well for a man trying to rekindle a relationship with his daughter, and finding love with a stripper, all while trying to make an honest living. The Ram still chooses to go on with the rematch, even if it may cost him his life.

I really hope that didn't spoil it for you. Because to be honest with you, that's the exact same info I knew going into this film, and I still walked out amazed. At the same time, Im sure many of our readers have not heard much of this film, and I'm not even sure if many of you are familiar with the work of Darren Aronofsky, I know I'm not. Same, I assume goes for lead actor Mickey Rourke; though I'm sure you may know him as Marv in Sin City. Never the less, the careers of both these men is unnecessary when seeing this film, as both shine in their roles.

For one, I really have to hand it to Aronofsky for putting this film together on such a low budget. Many a time, films are hurt by their lack of finances, but the result here just works so well. Besides the great acting, the style of the filming really brings this film alive. It's shot in a way that you feel as if you are with the characters; the look is very much like a documentary at parts. And then there's the lead of Randy "The Ram" Robinson, played by Mickey Rourke. At 56, and a former boxer, Rourke fits the part perfectly. He's able to get down right serious as a man on his last lucks, but at the same time he has the personality that will allow you to laugh a few times during the movie.

Then you have your supporting characters. The main one of course being Ram's love interest, Cassidy, who is played by Academy Award winner, Marisa Tomei. While in the end I found her character to be a little unnecessary, she did a good job to emphasize the parallel of how both her and Randy sell their bodies, and the troubles that may cause. And last on the important roles is Randy's daughter Stephanie, played by Evan Rachel Wood, who disowns her father for having never been there for her as a child and refuses to let herself get caught up in his time of need.

As I said I won't spoil anything, but there is one last aspect of the film I wanted to point out. The movie culminates with a song by Bruce Springsteen, "The Wrester", which was donated due to the film's low budget. The track does a wonderful job of ending the film and really sumarizes the character of Randy. And coming from a man that has never been a Springsteen fan, despite being from New Jersey, I hope it says something.

Overall this is a fantastic film, but it's certainly not for everyone. For one, it is rated R, as there adult themes, nudity, and violence; so if any of those aren't your thing you may want to steer clear of this. And don't be put off by the fact that it focuses on wrestling, because in the end that's not what it's about, it's about human life and knowing your place in life. It's truly an emotional work of art, and really goes to show that you can make a great film without a lot of money. You just need to know how to make it work, and that's exactly what director, Darren Aronofsky, and lead, Mickey Rourke, have done.

Overall Score - 9.8/10

Sure, as of writing this Mickey Rourke has won a Golden Globe for Best Actor in a Motion Picture - Drama, and Springsteen has won a Golden Globe for Best Original Song. But those don't beat the recognition of a VFH Seal of Approval! I'm sure you don't need much more convincing than what I've already written, but I have to say, no other film within the last year had me as emotionally drawn to it as The Wrestler, and I think that really is why it deserves this award. Hopefully you too will be able to catch this film when it releases nationwide on January 23rd, 2009.