Movie Review: ANNABELLE

ANNABELLE
Director: John R. Leonetti
Starring: Ward Horton, Annabelle Wallis, Alfre Woodard, Tony Amendola

If you saw The Conjuring, you may remember that it opened with scenes involving a possessed doll named Annabelle who the Warrens later took possession of and kept in their artifacts room. It should come as no surprise that with the huge success of that film, a follow-up was rushed into production. This time the studio decided to go the prequel route by telling the story of Annabelle and her time with Mia (Wallis) and John (Horton). They live in a cozy house and are expecting their first child. The baby’s room is decorated with a wide variety of dolls, many of which seem far too creepy for any newborn. One day John brings home a huge box with Annabelle inside and Mia couldn’t be any happier as it’s hard to find and completes a set. I’ll tell you why it’s hard to find. It’s old, cracked, and scary as hell. Why oh why would you put that in a baby’s room?

Soon after Annabelle arrives, their house becomes a haven for disaster. One night Mia is awoken by the sounds of her neighbors being brutally murdered. The killers make their way over to Mia and John’s house where one of them starts whispering for the doll. One of the intruders proceeds to kill herself while clutching the Annabelle doll. Strange occurrences start to happen throughout all hours of the day forcing Mia to have the baby early. Like many possession stories we have seen before, Mia and John move to a new house hoping to rid themselves of their problems. We all know this never works and the demons follow the couple to their new apartment.

The Conjuring was based on a true story and the real Annabelle doll is an old Raggedy Ann doll instead of a porcelain doll that's used in the movie. While that film stuck fairly close to the real life story of the Warrens, I am curious as to why they decided to give Annabelle a completely fictionalized story instead of using the true story that goes along with the real Raggedy Ann doll. There seems to be plenty of information out there regarding it, but maybe this was the faster and cheaper way of cranking out a paint-by-numbers script. I’ve seen enough of these types of movies that always seem to have a priest character (Amendola) and a mysterious neighbor character (Woodard). Is it so hard to create a different type of character that informs John and Mia that Annabelle is a conduit for evil spirits? Even the ending feels unoriginal and tired.

I was relieved to see that the film does stick to the 1970s timeline. I would not have been surprised if they were going to call it a prequel and than randomly set it in a contemporary timeline. The 1970s was one of the smartest choices they went for as it provides for some interesting design concepts to make up for the unoriginal story. The names John and Mia may ring a bell for you as they are clearly named after John Cassavetes and Mia Farrow who played the couple in Rosemary’s Baby. It is very apparent that director John R. Leonetti was inspired by Roman Polanski’s film. Leonetti was the director of photography on The Conjuring so he knows his way around lighting and shooting a horror film. The film sticks with using real effects to give it a more natural feel over relying on CGI. It makes sense with the time period and how horror films were shot in that decade. Don’t worry, the Annabelle doll doesn’t walk around or do silly Chucky type moves.

This may be the biggest project yet for stars Ward Horton and Annabelle Wallis. Horton had a small role in The Wolf of Wall Street and has had numerous one-episode appearances in a variety of television shows. Wallis has had some television work on Pan-Am and The Tudors. They are both strong enough actors to keep the characters grounded without feeling like they are ever over-acting or being the bimbos we often find in horror films. I just don’t feel like there is anything interesting about John or Mia. Maybe the point was to make them very normal and bland people. How can you make a movie work with two fairly unknown lead actors playing characters we don't really want to invest our time in?

I wish I could say that Annabelle is as exciting and scary as its predecessor. There are a couple of jumpy moments, but most of the scares tended to be dragged out longer than they needed to be. James Wan is attached to the film as one of the producers. He is the top-notch horror director behind The Conjuring, Insidious, and Saw, and I would have expected it to be better with his involvement.

Is It Worth Your Trip to the Movies? Go revisit The Conjuring or Rosemary's Baby instead.

RATING: 2 out of 5 TICKET STUBS

Movie Review: 22 JUMP STREET

22 JUMP STREET
Directors: Phil Lord, Christopher Miller
Starring: Jonah Hill, Channing Tatum, Ice Cube, Wyatt Russell, Jimmy Tatro, Amber Stevens, Nick Offerman, Peter Stromare

Most movies adapted from television shows rarely work, especially when a new cast and new characters are involved. Who would have thought that 21 Jump Street would have worked so well that a sequel would follow? Channing Tatum and Jonah Hill are back for another case as Jenko and Schmidt, respectively. The old church at 21 Jump Street that served as the police headquarters in the first film has been converted back to a church. How convenient for them that there is also a church across the street at 22 Jump Street that can now pose as the police headquarters.

Jenko and Schmidt are assigned their next case and this time it has them going under cover again as college students at MC State College. A new synthetic drug called WHYPHY is being passed around like candy, and one of the students dies of an overdose. The boys are given a picture of the girl getting the drug slipped to her, but the only identifiable feature of the dealer is a tattoo on his arm. Schmidt feels left out of their partnership after Jenko joins the football team and fraternity as fellow teammates Zook (Russell) and Rooster (Tatro) take him under their wing. Schmidt decides to pursue the case at a different angle by dating Maya (Stevens) who lives across the hallway from the victim.

If you are thinking that this plot sounds exactly like the first movie, but now they’re in college instead of high school, you are correct in your assessment. I was a bit worried when I first saw the trailer as it looked like a carbon copy of 21 Jump Street. In theory, this film should not work. Comedy sequels that completely rip off the jokes and plot of the first outing are typically insulting to the fans. Nick Offerman’s police chief has a not-so-subtle speech toward the guys describing how the police department was so happy with how the first task turned out that they want to send the boys out again on a similar case but with a bigger budget. This is exactly what studio executives pitch after a comedy makes the big bucks at the box office. They want the original cast to come back and make the same kind of movie again. The Hangover Part II is a prime example of why this is typically a horrible idea. That movie was a messy insult as it was the exact same movie as the first one. 22 Jump Street does that exact same thing, yet succeeds and surpasses expectations. Screenwriters Michael Ball, Oren Uziel, and Rodney Rothman have written about this exact commentary in their script. There are copious jokes and references as to how they are ripping off the first one. Even Mr. Tatum makes a reference to the premise of his movie White House Down at one point.

Tatum and Hill have this unique chemistry that completely works and is the reason why this rebooted franchise succeeds. Having two cops that are complete opposites is by no means a new concept, but I think part of the charm and humor is grounded in how well they play off each other. While it may have been funny having Jonah Hill paired up with Seth Rogen or James Franco, it would be a completely different kind of story and tone all together. Schmidt and Jenko are exaggerated stereotypes of the images people label under Hill and Tatum. Hill wrote the stories for the films, so I can assume he played into his persona a bit and made Tatum that good looking but dumb jock frat boy that Hollywood has probably labeled him at some point in his career. Ice Cube returns as Captain Dickson whose moments with Jonah Hill provide some of the best laughs in the movie. I’ll forgive him for making Ride Along. Dave Franco and Rob Riggle are back for cameos as prison inmates who offer some advice and help to Hill and Tatum.

The directing team of Christopher Miller and Phil Lord are the men behind The LEGO Movie and Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs. The LEGO Movie is another film of theirs that I would not have expected it to be as enjoyable as turned out to be. The laughs are pretty consistent throughout 22 Jump Street which was a surprise and a relief. It's hard not to laugh when Jonah Hill gets in way over his head wtih some of the more dangerous aspects of his job. The movie easily could have gone downhill fast. The comedy isn’t all the clever or original, yet it delivers. This is the baffling thing behind the movie. Everyone involved knows we’ve seen frat movies, spring break scenes, shoot-outs, buddy movies, terrible sequels, franchises, and they make fun of all of that along the way. I give them major credit for pulling this off so well. Make sure to stay through the credits, for a hilarious sequence that left the whole audience in stitches. I’m not sure what was funnier, the sequence or how my mother-in-law completely lost it because she was laughing so loudly.

Is it worth your trip to the movies? If you liked the first one, you will definitely enjoy the sequel. You can sign me up for 23 Jump Street.

RATING: 4 out of 5 TICKET STUBS

Movie Trailer: DUMB AND DUMBER TO

DUMB AND DUMBER TO
Director: Bobby Farrelly, Peter Farrelly
Starring: Jim Carrey, Jeff Daniels, Kathleen Turner, Rob Riggle

Lloyd Christmas (Carrey) and Harry Dunne (Daniels) are back for another crazy adventure. It's been twenty years since we last saw these two act as idiotic as possible. The original team has been reunited as directors Peter and Bobby Farrelly are back for a new tale as Harry and Lloyd go in search for the daughter Harry never knew he had.

The humor seems to be right in line with the original one. It has been many years since my last viewing of the first film, so I should probably watch it again soon. While I found it funny, it was never my go-to comedy of choice like it was for so many of my friends. These reunion types of movies are all the rage, so the expectations are quite high. I know Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels were very picky about the script. Why would the do the film if the script wasn't perfect? I hope I'm not as disappointed in this like I was with Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues.

Feel free to leave you first impressions below!

Release Date: November 14, 2014

Here's the trailer:

Movie Review: ANCHORMAN 2: THE LEGEND CONTINUES

ANCHORMAN 2: THE LEGEND CONTINUES
Director: Adam McKay
Starring: Will Ferrell, Paul Rudd, Steve Carell, David Koechner, Christina Applegate, Kristen Wiig, Dylan Baker, Greg Kinnear, Meagan Good.

The guys from the Channel 4 news team are back! It has been nearly a decade since Will Ferrell donned the mustache and fabulous hair as Ron Burgandy. Ron and his talented wife Veronica Corningstone (Applegate) are now co-anchors together and think they are being offered a promotion to the nightly primetime slot after anchor Mack Tannen (Harrison Ford cameo!) calls them into his office. The news does not quite go to plan as Veronica gets the promotion and Ron gets fired. By the hammer of Thor, no one fires Ron Burgandy! Ron does not take the news lightly as he is furious with Veronica and leaves her and their son, Walter, behind and heads back to San Diego.

Months pass and Ron is depressed and drowning himself in scotchy scotch scotch. He is approached by Freddie Sharp (Baker) of GNN, Global News Network about a new opportunity to be a part of the first 24-hour news station. He comes aboard and gathers his old crew of sports guy Champ Kind (Koechner), field reporter Brian Fantana (Rudd), and meteorologist Brick Tamland (Carell). Things do not look so bright once they hit headquarters and find out they have been given the graveyard shift time slot while their rival Jack Lime (Marsden) gets the primetime slot.

I will admit here that Anchorman and Elf are the only two Will Ferrell movies that I find are laugh out loud funny upon multiple viewings. On the contrary, I think Step Brothers is one of the dumbest movies ever made. I was so happy when news broke that Ferrell and co-creator Adam McKay would finally write a sequel to their smash hit. Comedy sequels are very hard to do well. They are rarely funnier than the first as the jokes get recycled and the laughs seem forced. The actors seem dull and bored and are only doing it for the easy paycheck. I thought that if any recent comedy could have a successful sequel, it would be Anchorman.

Why why why was I so disappointed? For one thing, the film is way too long. Even though the runtime is only two hours, it still feels long. I think McKay and Ferrell knew the audience would eat up anything they wrote without editing it down or realizing the pacing of many of the scenes. It feels over-stuffed and over-crowded with material that does not always work or works only for a bit. The whole idea behind Ron gathering the old gang takes way too long. Couldn’t we have just done a quick montage or something? Steve Carell’s Brick is expanded into a bigger role and actually given a subplot where he falls in love with the female version of Brick in fellow co-worker Chani (Wiig). I love Wiig and Carell, but all of that is so unnecessary. Part of what makes Brick funny is that he is quieter and the opposite in tone to Ron. The infamous quote “I love lamp” is perfect as it is a short random one-liner. That is what makes Brick funny. Giving him longer lines and a love interest loses the charm and innocence with the character. Brick and Chani just turn annoying after a few minutes. I think the overall story itself would have been fine if it was kept between Ron and the crew versus the Jack Lime character. It could have been simple but funny. Ferrell and McKay added in a boyfriend (Kinnear) for Veronica and a new boss (Good) for Ron to have anger towards. Giving attention to all of these people just makes the film feel bloated. There are some good laughs to be had here and there, but it is not consistent like it was in the first film. We do get treated to another brawl involving all of the local news teams, which is the high point of the film. That whole bit is chock full of celeb cameos.

I really wanted to like this movie. I wanted Ferrell and McKay to prove that comedy sequels can be successful. The first film felt smart and fresh. Here the laughs just seem stupid and cheap. I do not think my sense of humor has changed as I still find the first one hysterical no matter how many times I watch it. Frankly, I expected a lot more out of it. Maybe I was asking too much for an Anchorman sequel. We basically had a private screening of the film when we saw it as the other group behind us left halfway through. Would I have laughed more if it was a full house laughing their asses off? Maybe. A good comedy should be funny regardless of it is one person watching it alone or hundred people watching it together.

RATING: ** (2 out of 5 stars)

Movie Review: INSIDIOUS: CHAPTER 2

INSIDIOUS: CHAPTER 2
Director: James Wan
Starring: Patrick Wilson, Rose Byrne, Barbara Hershey, Lin Shaye, Ty Simpkins, Steve Coulter, Leigh Whannell, Angus Sampson

Director James Wan and screenwriter Leigh Whannell shocked horror fans with 2011's Insidious, one of the best films of the genre in the last ten years. It was inevitable that a sequel would be green lit. Whannell and Wan got the whole cast back together for a deeper look into the Lambert family. Josh (Wilson) and Renai (Byrne) are relieved to have their son Dalton (Simpkins) back to normal after a mysterious spirit haunted him. The events of that evening have left their medium Elise (Laye) dead with Josh being investigated for her death.

The Lamberts have moved back into Josh’s childhood home with his mother Lorraine (Hershey) even though they should know that it was not their previous house that haunted them. The spirits that possess both Josh and Dalton will never leave them no matter what home they are in. Renai starts hearing things go bump in the night, the piano start playing, and sees the woman in the white dress in her house. Josh is acting out of character and is adamant that she ignore these warning signs, but she knows all too well that their nightmare is not over. Josh’s body has been taken over by a spirit while he is still stuck in the other realm known as “The Further”. Elise’s colleagues and partners-in-crime Specs (Whannell) and Tucker (Sampson) are called in with the help of retired psychic Carl (Coulter) to bring Josh back and put an end to this nightmare.

There are two routes you can take when making a horror sequel. You can either continue on with the same story and same characters by fleshing it out with a back story, unveiling some hidden truths, and finding new ways to scare the audience. This must all be done while staying within that world you've already created. The other approach is to take the same theme/serial killer/demon and have him/it attack a new crop of victims. Approach number one is definitely the harder path to take, but ultimately, the path I typically enjoy with my horror sequels. It was smart for Wan and Whannell to continue on with the Lambert's story. Like I previously mentioned, Insidious: Chapter 2 picks up directly where the first film left off and delves a bit deeper into the mythology and ideas behind astral projection. These characters get so deep into these alternate worlds and realms that it can feel a bit muddled at times. "The Further" does not seem to have any time continuum either which makes things a bit more challenging if you are trying to figure out the chronology of it all. Maybe I was trying to think too hard during a horror movie. You really need to have a good understanding of the first film and know it fairly well in order to sink into this one. I do not think you could watch this one without seeing the first one and not feel completely lost. Yes, many of the characters do plenty of explaining and recaps for us but that does not do any justice to what is unleashed in the first chapter.

If you allow yourself to go there and dive into these alternate realms and go into "The Further", you will find this movie scary. You will inevitably jump and make some sort of vocalization each time you are startled. I had a harder time going all the way there, so I did not find this as scary as the first film or even The Conjuring, which also was directed by James Wan and starred Patrick Wilson. I find the story of The Conjuring a bit more realistic and believable which in turn makes it scarier to me. That is the beauty of the horror genre. It is all so subjective to each viewer.

Another element that sets this series apart from others is the talented cast. Wilson, Bryne, Hershey, and Shaye give very realistic and grounded performances that make the story all the more credible. Even if you find astral projection and demons to be a bit hokey, you can still feel something for these characters. They are not the dumb teenagers that get trapped in a cabin or are seen running through the woods hiding from the killer while screaming their faces off.

James Wan is not new to the horror genre as he arrived on the scene with 2004's Saw. Each one of his films is a bit different and caters to a different type of lover of the horror genre. I love horror, but The Conjuring is more my style than the torture porn of Saw. It is obvious when watching his films that Wan has an appreciation for the genre and knows it well. Some may roll their eyes at the very obvious references to The Shining in this film, but I see them more as a nod and homage to a classic than Wan ripping off Kubrick. He is a gifted filmmaker that even though Insidious: Chapter 2 may not be as on par with the first, it is still entertaining, frightening, and leagues better than many other supposed "scary" movies that are released each year.

RATING: *** 1/2 (3.5 out of 5 stars)