A BLOG DEDICATED TO MY LOVE OF THE SILVER SCREEN
Established May 2010.


Gordie: Do you think I'm weird?
Chris: Definitely.
Gordie: No man, seriously. Am I weird?
Chris: Yeah, but so what? Everybody's weird.
-STAND BY ME

Film Critic for Twin Cities Live

Member of THE LAMB: The Large Association of Movie Blogs LAMB #1588

Follow me on Twitter for updates to my blog and other fun movie news. Find me at @PaulsMovieTrip

Find and "like" me on Facebook at Paul's Trip to the Movies


Showing posts with label Jack Reynor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jack Reynor. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 1, 2014

Movie Review: TRANSFORMERS: AGE OF EXTINCTION

TRANSFORMERS: AGE OF EXTINCTION
Director: Michael Bay
Starring: Mark Wahlberg, Nicola Peltz, Jack Reynor, Stanley Tucci, Kelsey Grammer, Titus Welliver, T.J. Miller


I should have known that when I heard the line “My face is the warrant” from Titus Welliver that I was in for a certain kind of cinematic “treat”. I actually went into Transformers: Age of Extinction with a little bit of hope that it could actually be good. The trailers looked awful, but I had faith in Mark Wahlberg and Stanley Tucci that they wouldn’t have signed on for a crappy movie. One would assume they saw the first three movies and knew what they were getting themselves into. This is the fourth film in this Michael Bay series, but we have a brand new set of characters thanks to returning screenwriter Ehren Kruger. Wahlberg and Tucci must have seen something different in this script that prompted another go after the first trilogy ended. Surely they weren’t just doing it for the residual checks that will come down the road.


Wahlberg is seen tinkering around in his barn as engineer and inventor Cade Yeager. He loves salvaging old machine parts of all sorts trying to make robots and other homemade inventions in hopes of earning a buck or two. He lives there with his college bound daughter Tessa (Pelz), and they are flat broke. Eviction notices are piling up as Cade can’t seem to make a profit off his creations. Cade and his friend Lucas (Miller) buy an old semi-truck at a run-down theater in hopes of breaking it down for parts. After spending some time with it back at the barn, it starts to come alive and Cade realizes that it’s a Transformer. Oh no, it’s not just some random Transformer, its OPTIMUS PRIME!


This big reveal can’t stay a secret for too long. There is a government project called “Cemetery Wind” led by Kelsey Grammer’s Harold Attinger. His team is led by Titus Welliver’s James Savoy, and they come knocking on the Yeager barn door pretty quickly. The project plans on eliminating all of the known Transformers that survived the attack on Chicago which happened in the original trilogy. Let’s not forget about Stanley Tucci who comes into play as a scientist trying to build his own type of Transformers. An all-out war ensues between Optimus Prime and his fellow Autobots versus these new Transformers that have come into play. Cade, Tessa, her boyfriend Shane (Reynor) and the rest of the humans are along for the ride as they follow the Transformers and their battle from Chicago to Beijing to Hong Kong.



I already feel exhausted trying to remember what happened or what didn’t happen during that 2 hours and 45 minutes I won’t get back. Most movies that are that long better have a decent plot and interesting characters in order for that kind of runtime to feel warranted. This has NONE of that. In what kind of cinematic world do we live in where we allow a movie that is this long with no redeeming qualities to exist? There is no need for a Transformers movie to be this long, yet all four of them have exceeded a two hour run time. The story is a series of explosions, attacks, and battles repeated over and over each taking place in a different city cranked up some ridiculously high sound volume. With such high octane and fuel going into this movie, there are about two different tempos going on. The cinematography is so frantic that the camera wizzes around so fast that you can’t see straight which is even more problematic if you see it in 3D. Am I already getting that old that it was hurting my eyes? The other tempo comes at that the opposite end of the spectrum with the multitude of “slo-mo” shots with our various characters running away from the action in order to survive. I would understand one or two but it was so excessive it was comical.



Let’s not forget all of the added moments of unnecessary bits, one-liners, and cheesy declarations that further add on run time. Screenwriter Ehren Kruger penned the second and third film, so he is very familiar with this series and working with Michael Bay. I wonder if they just sat around and thought of the most obnoxious and ridiculous lines of dialogue imaginable. A bad script typically leads to some bad acting. Have no fear as that concept still holds true here. Mark Wahlberg is doing a really good impression of Andy Samberg’s impression of Mark Wahlberg that he used to do while on Saturday Night Live. If you’ve ever seen Samberg’s sketches, you know what I’m talking about. Stanley Tucci comes off a bit better as there is a bit of campiness with his character that Mr. Wahlberg couldn’t pull off. Then there's poor Nicola Peltz, who does good work on Bates Motel, but is left screaming “Daaaaaad!” or “I’M. NOT. LEAVING. MY. DAD!”


I suppose one could say that you know what you are getting yourself into when you see any sort of Michael Bay movie. Do you go in expecting it to be this dumb, loud, action film? Yes. However, I don’t think that means it has to be completely stupid, over-the-top, and laughable or that he gets a free pass for how the final product turns out. I feel like making a Transformers movie could work. You could have decent characters, witty dialogue, and a movie that clocks in under two hours. Isn't this supposed to appeal to kids? I don't have any kids yet, but I am curious if a young moviegoer would sit through that run time? Are the explosions enough to keep them interested?  Godzilla is a good example of how you take movie that has some camp and make it fun and exciting. With so many awful one-liners, slo-mo runs, explosions, and fits of rage thrown around, I started to wonder if Bay and Kruger were trying to make the worst movie possible? Did they think they were making gold and has the audience been had in some sort of meta sense? I’ve talked to numerous people who have seen Transformers: Age of Extinction, and a majority of them that it was epically awful as well. At least I’m not the only one.

Is it Worth Your Trip to the Movies? Why would you waste $15 and 2 hours and 45 minutes of your day on this garbage?

RATING: 1/2 out of 5 Ticket Stubs



Pin It Now!

Friday, December 6, 2013

Movie Review: DELIVERY MAN

DELIVERY MAN
Director: Ken Scott
Starring: Vince Vaughn, Chris Pratt, Cobie Smulders, Bobby Moynihan, Britt Robertson, Jack Reynor


It is not unheard of for a director to do a remake of his own work. Alfred Hitchcock did it with The Man Who Knew Too Much. Michael Haneke released two versions of Funny Games. Director Ken Scott's 2011 film Starbuck received pretty positive reviews and was screened at the Toronto International Film Festival. His follow-up to that is an exact remake to that film, but now stars Vince Vaughn and is renamed as Delivery Man. David Wozniak (Vaughn) is an incompetent, irresponsible, delivery man working for his family's meat market. He cannot seem to handle any task large or small that comes his way. He decides to start growing marijuana in his apartment because he owes $80,000 to some drug lords. He soon finds out his ex-girlfriend Emma (Smulders) is now pregnant. He sees this as the eye-opener he needs to get his life back together if she will let him back into her life.


To make matters even worse, David finds out that he has fathered 533 children after donating to a sperm bank in his twenties. He made his donations under the name "Starbuck" and now 142 of them have gathered together to form a class action lawsuit for his identity to be unveiled. He is handed a list of names, contact information, and pictures of these 142 children and attempts to meet them without them knowing who he is. He wants to do some sort of good samaritan deed as each of them seem to have problems or be in some sort of rut. He turns to his friend Brett (Pratt), a non-licensed lawyer, for help on his case who strongly objects to every step David is taking when dealing with his new predicament.


Right from the opening scene you see that David is not a great guy. He is that irresponsible slob that you just do not have time for or even care about. With Vince Vaughn playing him, he brings out that cocky jerk type quality he brings into every role. You have no sympathy whatsoever for the character as he keeps making these dumb decisions over and over again. His good deed attempts try to be genuine, but the script never allows us to fully get to know these new children that he is helping. We only get to know roughly six of them that each get their basic introduction scene when David meets them and then fade into the rest of the group after that. The overall writing seems poor and disjointed at times. There is a general wash of emotion from the children as they all feel the same way about David. They all want to meet him and as the story unfolds they all still continue to feel chummy and happy about him no matter what lies and deception he has told. You cannot tell me that each of them would all react the exact same way or that a few of them wouldn't be a little more pissed off than the others. The subplot of David owing $80,000 is unneeded and feels out of place the very few times we come back to it. It feels like an unnecessary plot device to just show him off as a deadbeat.


I kept wondering if this was supposed to be a comedy, a drama, a dramedy, or some sort of feel good inspirational movie. To put it frankly, I got a little bored at times. That is what happens when I do not really care about any of the characters. I have heard wonderful things about Starbuck. Much of this remake is a direct replica of that as Ken Scott wrote and directed both of them, so I am wondering how this one really missed the mark. You may be thinking that I truly hated this movie, but that is not the case. It will not even make my Worst of 2013 list. There are already five films on the list that are worse offenders. It has an interesting premise, and I enjoyed the concept of the good deeds he does for his children. I keep calling them children, but they are all in their twenties. There is potential here, but it all comes down to the execution of how we get to the point. This same story and idea could have been structured in a different way with better character development and more heart to have the audience feel a bit more sympathy for David or the children. I know it would have been far more enjoyable with a different actor as the title character.  I wonder what it would have been like with either Steve Carell or Adam Scott as David.  Instead of re-imagining this movie, maybe I should just head over to my Netflix streaming queue as Starbuck is available in that format.

RATING: ** (2 out of 5 stars)

Pin It Now!