Count Down 100 Movies from 2013 (Multiple users) Tele page 20

[baumer]

82) 47 Ronin:  I will search for you through 1000 worlds and 10,000 lifetimes.

 

At number 82, we are finally getting into films that I liked more than disliked.  47 Ronin has a lot of good going for it.  It's beautifully shot, is based on history and it stars Keanu Reeves, who I have liked since I saw him in The River's Edge.  And as an historical epic it's an interesting film.  I'm sure there were a lot of Hollywoodizing in the film but overall, it's based in historical fact.  But part of what prevents this film from being higher on the list is that it moves a bit slow and Reeve's is really wooden in the film.  I blame the director for this, not the actor.  There is only one speed, one emotion and one face that Kai is allowed to emote.  And that is the wrong note.  Here he is dealing with his love for his leader, the love of a woman and the anger of being enslaved.  But all we see is a blank look of consternation.  If there were a few changes in the film, it could have been much, much better.  

***Sidenote:  Gedde Watanabe has a minor role in the film.  He made a name for himself in the 80's when he was arguably the most memorable part of John Hughe's Sixteen Candles, where he played foreign exchange student, Long Duck Dong.

 

       

 

 

81) The Colony:  The world froze over so long ago, I can't remember the warmth of the sun.

 

Here's a film that is so close to being great.  It's the story of a post-apocalyptic future where an ice age has engulfed the world.  Instead of dying off like the dinosaurs did, groups of humans have formed colonies in different parts of the country.  The film never says it, but this is a Canadian production and one of the benefits of it being Canadian is that it is filmed in an abandoned NORAD base in North Bay Ontario.  So there are no special effects when it comes to the weather, what you see is what is really there.  For those of you not familiar with North Bay in the winter, think of Fargo in the winter, or for our Norwegian friends, think Oslo.  Bottom line, it's frikkin cold.  So the setting is authentic.  Also a good aspect of the film is the cast.  Bill Paxton and Lawrence Fishburn lead the way and both are very good.  Paxton plays the ornery leader of the colony and Fishburn is the guy who fights his tyrannical rule every step of the way.  

 

The reason the film isn't higher than it is, is for one reason and that is the script.  I know that when you have a film like this, there is only so much you can do.  But at times, you feel like you are watching Aliens.  Sometimes the dialogue is straight from Cameron's 27 year old movie.   And that's unfortunate because there is a good film here, but again, not a great one.  Perhaps Toronto Star film critic said it best, "it shows investors how well Canadians can mimic Hollywood blockbusters, decent CGI and all, using a fraction of the budget."

***Sidenote: During filming, there were days when the temperature outside would fall to as low as -50C with the windchill.

 

 

 

[baumer]

80) Gangster Squad:   Go back to Chicago and tell them what you saw tonight.  You tell them that Los Angeles belongs to Mickey Cohen.

 

Gangster Squad had a lot going for it with a fantastic cast of actors in the prime of their careers and great period setting for a film. LA Confidential's was only a year or two after the time line of this movie, it could've been a good followup noir style of film itself. But the direction and screenplay for the movie were only average.

Sean Penn was fantastic in the Mickey Cohen role but a tad bit over the top in his portrayal of him, but his over the top performance is part of what made it so good.  This is very reminiscent of his role in Mystic River. Josh Brolin is pretty good as the lead. Ryan Gosling is on a roll lately and is very strong in the #2 role. Overall a very good cast with a lot of great actors filling out the cast. If they had just fleshed out the screenplay a bit more it could have been a fantastic move.  As it is, it's a good one.

***Sidenote:   Bryan Cranston was cast as Max Kennard but had to drop out due to a scheduling conflict with Argo.

 

 

 

79) Warm Bodies:  We're seeing corpses fighting skeletons, sir.

 

Romantic comedies are particularly difficult to reinvent. They are typically a formula of "boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy wins girl" with some variations. There is usually another romantic interest. "Warm Bodies" adds a totally unique and fresh twist to the formula. Boy meets girl, but he's a zombie.

This movie is very much based on Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet". Instead of the Montagues and Capulets it's the living and the zombies. There are many more subtleties that reference Romeo and Juliet.  But it's all done to the theme of zombies, which, along with vampires, seems to be the flavour of the decade.  You can thank Twilight (yes it's true) and The Walking Dead for this craze.  

 

They say there are 7 stories you can tell in Hollywood.  It's how you tell them that matters.  This story has been done a million times before, but it's told with just a bit of a twist and it works well.  It's a nice film, not one of the top 50 of the year, but still a nice film.  

 

And it has to be said, Teresa Palmer is absolutely gorgeous.  Her, along with Margot Robbie have to be the breakout female stars of the year.  If they every appear in a film together, I might melt.

***Sidenote:  The film grossed 116 million dollars world wide.  The US had the highest gross, but interestingly enough, South Korea had the highest international gross with 7 million.

 

 

Edited January 8, 2014 by Christmas baumer

[Kvikk Lunsj]

Great job so far Baumer. I am excited to see the rest. 

[baumer]

I'll be doing some more today.....starting with The Hobbit.  

[baumer]

78) The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug:    Well, thief!  I smell you. I hear your breath, I feel you air.  Where are you?

 

The first time I saw this film, I hated it.  The second time I saw it, I just disliked it.  It went from an abomination to just a silly film.  The CGI in this is bad, especially during the barrel scene.  I could go on an on about what I disliked about it but out of respect to the loonies here, I won't slag it all that much.  I'll just say that both Hobbit films have bored me to no end.  Where AUJ was a bad film, this one is a bit worse.  

***Sidenote: Benedict Cumberatch sudied iguanas and Komodo dragons to prepare for his role as Smaug.  

 

 

 

77) Iron Man 3:  Yo can take away my suits, you can take away my home, but the one thing you can never take away from me: I am Iron Man.

 

I absolutely loved Iron Man.  I pretty much hated Iron Man 2.  Iron Man 3 isn't much better than 2 but it is more ambitious.  There's all kinds of hate for the film because of the silly villain.  While I agree the villain's real motivation was really stupid and kind of childish, I didn't mind it all that much.  Directed by Shane Black, who took over the duty from Jon Favreau, the film was in good hands.  Black is perhaps most famous for writing the uber successful first two Lethal Weapon films and also staring as Hawkins in Joel Silver's Predator.  Now he is responsible for directing one of the most anticipated films of the year.  While I think Black did a good job directing the film, I don't think he did a great job deciding what should be left on the cutting room floor.  What we were left with was fire breathing me, exploding people and essentially a bunch of plot pieces that seemed to be better served in another film, not in an Iron Man film.  IMO, and I have no proof of this, but imo, the reason so many super hero films end up being poor is because there are too many cooks in the kitchen.  There are too many people giving their input and telling others what should and shouldn't be in here.  Iron Man 3 and Spider-man 3 are the poster children for this.

***Sidenote:    Shane Black admitted that Jon Favreau gave him tips and advice during film, which Black was very grateful for. 

 

 

76) Runner Runner:   This is your job.  You want a clear conscience, go start a charity.

 

Mitch McDeere  Richie Furst is a young man with a promising future in Law stocks. About to sit his Bar exam Having trouble meeting his tuition, he is approached by 'The Firm'   he feels he is cheated out of some winnings by a powerful internet gambling site, so he approaches the man and made an offer he doesn't refuse. Seduced by the money and gifts showered on him, he is totally oblivious to the more sinister side of his company. Then, two Associates are murdered. The FBI contact him, asking him for information and suddenly his life is ruined. He has a choice - work with the FBI, or stay with the Firm Gambling site.. Either way he will lose his life as he knows it. Mitch Richie figures the only way out is to follow his own plan...

 

Runner Runner is entertaining and it has a good performance from Oscar winner and soon to be tight wearing, Ben Affleck.  But the film is basically a word for word, carbon copy of the Tom Cruise film from 20 years ago.  It's a fine enough film, but nothing ground breaking.

***Sidenote:  Principal filming took place in Puetro Rico and Princeton University.

 

Edited January 9, 2014 by Christmas baumer

[baumer]

75) Closed Circuit: There is some evidence against you that the prosecution thinks should be kept secret.

 

Once in a while, like clockwork, a movie appears to display the horrific corruption of governmental security agencies and how, in the shadow, they kill and do whatever they please, in detriment of justice and without any kind of oversight. Such a movie is Closed Circuit, a British movie. 

I think Eric Bana is a good actor in the right role and this is a role that where he certainly has screen presence.  A lot of the cast is also made of seasoned well trained actors who do well. The subject is also close to my heart. 

Steve Martin's character in The Grand Canyon said, "Watch the movies, they have all the answers." This is a movie that touches on a lot of the things that we are dealing with now.  The NDAA was clandestinely approved without any of us knowing and now, just like the movie Enemy of the State prognosticated, we are now dealing with the American government being allowed to listen to all of our phone calls.  So this movie is very relevant.

 

For that reason alone, I recommend you see it.  It doesn't go as deep as it should and one day I'm waiting for a film to just go balls deep and let it all hang out.  There were a few this year that touched on what is out there, but they just didn't go all the way.

 

Overall it's a good film and one that demands to be seen, just don't expect it to say something that you didn't already know, even if don't care all that much.
***Sidenote:  Tim Bevan produced this film and has been nominated for three oscars, including Fargo.

 

 

74) Quartet: This is not a retirement home, it's a madhouse

 

One of the more surprising films of the year, Quarter is a film about what seems to be a prestigious retirement home for former well renowned musicians.  You won't find Alice Cooper here or Willie Nelson but more along the lines of classical performers.  

 

The wonderful thing about Dustin Hoffman's directorial debut is that he gets beautiful performances out of every actor and the cast is one that he is blessed to be working with.  Maggie Smith and Billy Connolly are the standouts.  Connolly has the humorous role and Smith is a bit more serious but together, or separate, they work well within the strands of the film.  And one of the strengths of the movie is that it takes the subject matter seriously.  This is a world not usually witnessed by us, the film goer.  Usually we see films about young people doing more interesting things than spending their time at a retirement home.  But with Quartet, we have a very smart script and it has old people doing things that are interesting.  Hoffman does a nice job with the film and it's too bad it was ignored because it is one of the good films of 2013.

***Sidenote   Maggie Smith also starred in another film named Quarter in 1981.  However, the only similarities between the two films are the name and Smith.

 

 

 

[CoolioD1]

An Unexpected Journey was 2012. You mean the Desolation of SMAOOWWUG.

Edited January 9, 2014 by CoolioD1

[baumer]

An Unexpected Journey was 2012. You mean the Desolation of SMAOOWWUG.

 

 

lol, yes you are right.....

[baumer]

73) Beautiful Creatures:  Close your eyes, say with your mind what you're looking for as if you already found it.

 

There are way too many YA stories being developed into films now.  Case in point is the diminishing box office returns of so many of them.  Everyone thinks they can develop the next Twilight.  Everyone thinks the formula is simple.  Young, hot actors, a romantic love story between a mortal and a not so mortal (or something like that) and a fantastical story where two worlds collide.  Frankly, it's overdone and the studios that invested heavily in these stories are losing piles of money because of it.  Beautiful Creatures is a decent movie, better than most post Twilight YA films but it absolutely tanked at the domestic box office and didn't do much better internationally.

 

Beautiful Creatures features three Oscar nominated actors hamming it up.  Jeremy Irons, Viola Davis and double Oscar winner Emma Thompson all shine.  Thompson gets to cut loose in this film.  She won best supporting actress for Howards End.  This is about as opposite a role as she could take from that one, and yet here she is screeching, yelling and generally having what appears to be a lot of fun.  At the end of the day, there are a lot of contrived plot points, a lot of contrived symbolism and a lot of contrived writing.  But somehow it almost works to perfection.  Almost, but not quite.  Still, it's one of the better Twilight rip offs to come out in the last few years.  

***Sidenote:  Filming in Louisiana was temporarily halted due to a tornado warning.

 

 

72) Bullet to the Head:  Are we gonna fight or are you planning on boring me to death?

 

Walter Hill returns to direct another male-centric film, this time starring Sylvester Stallone and Jason Mamoa.  Stallone has always had screen presence, but what really makes this film worth seeing, even if just once, is Jason Mamoa. I didn't realize the screen presence this guy has. I really didn't like the Conan remake all that much and maybe because he was surrounded with other giant human beings I never really got to see how much of a physical specimen he is. But put him next to Stallone, who is 5'10, he not only towers over him, but he just looks and feels like a physically superior specimen. But even more than that, his screen presense in here was incredible. When he was on screen the film was better. His character isn't just the muscle, he has an interesting story arc to him. Much more interesting that Stallone's, which brings the film down from what could have been a really good action film to just a decent but forgettable one.

Some of the problem is that Jimmy Bobo isn't really a likable character. He's very shady and his background is shrouded in mystery. He's a hired hitman who does jobs just for the money and really doesn't care who he kills. He kills a cop at the beginning, without knowing he is one, but nonetheless, he still offed him. He also has a very shady background. But the people he is going after in the film are very very bad of course, so that means we are supposed to like him. I wasn't really sold on him in the film as a good guy or a bad guy.

Walter Hill is in top form here. He is a veteran of the action film and of the buddy action film. His credits include some of my favourites like 48 Hours, Extreme Prejudice and he even produced the Aliens series. His action scenes are very well done and the final "Viking" fight between Sly and Momoa is thrilling and exhilirating. It's good to see his style in this film.

Overall I liked it but I didn't love it. I think Stallone can still be relevant in films but the solo action here is basically dead.  Bullet to the Head is fine, just nothing memorable.

***Sidenote:  This was Christian Slater's first studio film in 8 years.

 

 

71) Man of Steel:  Goodbye my son, our hopes and dreams travel with you.

 

This is an ambitious failure.  It ranks higher than some films I liked more simply because I give it points for trying to reinvent Superman.

 

Part of the problem is that there is just too much happening that it goes from a slow burn to a frenetic mess that looks like a video game.  When Superman came outin 1978, the money shot was Superman rescuing Lois after she fell out of the helicopter.  Her question to him was "You've got me, but who's got you?"  There was a wonder, a wide eyed excitement to see how they would make him fly.  Even the tagline was "You will believe a man can fly."

 

Now with MOS, there is no wonder, there is no awe and there is no shock.  Anything that can be dreamed up can be done.  And that's fine but when you can dream up what they did in this movie, it loses its sense of realism and it loses its sense of plausibility and this caused me not to really care all that much about what happens to people.  When Superman fights Zod for the second time, it's just two blurs blasting through building after building after building.  It's okay the first few times but after the 10th building of structure they crashed through, it gets cumbersome.  And you are watching Superman fight Zod and his other super cronies and you are wondering how he is going to beat them.  They are his equal.  The sun gives them their power.  Also, in Superman 2, the three villains get released from their prison from a nuclear blast.  They arrive on Earth with nothing.  But in MOS, the whole army arrives with advanced weaponry.  In Superman 2, Superman couldn't take them alone.  So he outsmarted them by putting them in the chamber that sucks all their powers.  This makes much more sense than battling it out in a fistfight with a man who is just as impervious to pain as you are.  By this logic, the Joker would have beaten Zod because he too realized that you don't fight a man who is more powerful than you physically.  But Supes just keeps punching him hoping that this will work. 

 

There are some good things about MOS.  I thought both Robin Hoods were good, Costner and Crowe.  Costner had some of the best acting of his career in here and Crowe was equally as good.  Lois' character was a bright spot as well.  I thought Shannon as Zod was horrible and I couldn't get Stamp's performance out of my head when watching Shannon's.  I guess you can blame Zack Snyder for this but overall, it just seemed off in so many ways.

***Sidenote:  Henry Cavill had met Russell Crowe years earlier when he was an extra on Proof of Life.  Crowe gave him words of encouragement and Cavill never forgot it and then thanked Crowe on the set Superman for those words of encouragement.

 

[baumer]

70) Out of the Furnace:   Working for a living?  I gave my life for this country and what's it done for me?  HUH?!!  What's it done FOR ME!!??

 

I wanted to like this movie a lot more than I did.  I was disappointed in it given the cast and the trailer that completely reeled me in.  But it's slow, very anti-climatic and imo, there was so much more story to tell.  Even though the film runs at 2 hours, it would have benefited from another 15-20 minutes.  The Casey Affleck story is the best part of the film and he has a meltdown in front of his brother, which made me want to know this guy more.  The film really only touches on what he must be going through.  He did 4 tours in Iraq and like John Rambo in First Blood, he is scarred emotionally and physically.  I wanted to spend more time with him.  But the film spends more time on the dynamic between Bale and his ex girlfriend and so many other issues that were interesting but not compelling.  In my opinion, they focused on the wrong character.  Christian Bale gives another fantastic performance and some of the other actors in here are also very good, but this is a movie with two stories.  I liked the shorter and not as developed one better.

***Sidenote:  Two interesting notes here. 1) Leonardo DiCaprio and Ridley Scott were slated to star and direct the film.  They eventually had to pass but they both stayed on as producers. 2) Viggo Mortensen was approached for the role that eventually went to Woody Harrelson.

 

 

69) Paranoia: Privacy. Absolute Myth.  There is no such thing.

 

I like movies that interest me.  I have an interest in what is happening to our rights and to our privacy.  In short, they are being taken away from us one small piece at a time.  Paranoia doesn't cover all these issues the way that The Fifth Estate does but it does get into something else that we can all relate to.  We all want to live the dream.  But unless you win the lottery or strike it rich somehow, it seems like living that lifestyle is unobtainable.  But this film shows the hope that one man has.  He is lured into the world by two corporate scumbags, played with absolute disgusting and swarmy pleasure by Harrison Ford and Gary Oldman.  Liam Hemsworth plays the pawn and the gorgeous and seductive Amber Heard is the love interest.

 

I enjoyed the film because it's quickly paced and it shows the price one has to pay to get where they want to be.  Kurt Russell says in Tombstone, "I already have a guilty conscience, might as well have the money too."  That should have been the tag line for the movie.  It's not in the upper echelon of films this year, but it's a lot better than most give it credit for.

***Sidenote:  This is Ford and Oldman's first film together since Air Force One.

 

[baumer]

68) The Lone Ranger:  It was a ranger, riding a white horse. Got some lunatic indian with him. They're coming for you.  

 

TLR is a mixed film for me.  I really enjoyed a lot of it but there were parts of it that really drag it down.  I'm a little shocked that some people are complaining about Depp.  I thought he was by far (and it's not even close) the best part of the film.  When he's on screen, it is so much better than when he is not.  There was a stretch of about 15 minutes where he is nowhere to be seen and the film suffers for it.

 

I thought William Fichtner was a very good villain and he was almost unrecognizable at first.  He really looked like he went head first into the role and he pulled it off beautifully.

 

But there are pacing issues and the movie just goes on way too long.  It should have ended twice maybe three times but it just keeps going.

 

I didn't like how much of a boyscout the Lone Ranger was as he was kind of stupid in many scenes.  I also didn't like the modern day Tonto telling the story, it took you out of the rhythm of the film.  The action and the set pieces and the visuals were incredible and some of the best non action CGI that kind of reminded me of Raiders of the Lost Ark. Gore Verbinski is one of the best directors working today in my opinion and he proves it here.  Yes the film has some issues but the good parts of it almost outweigh the bad.  The frenetic action in here is all because of Verbinski's eye for detail.  He had a lot to oversee here and the final epic action scene concerning the train sequence is old school Spielbergian in many ways.

 

I don't understand the hate for the film but I do understand why it is not loved.

***Sidenote:  I found this interesting, but I am not going to write it all out, so I will just copy and paste:

Despite being one of the biggest box office disasters of 2013, Jerry Bruckheimer believes that The Lone Ranger (2013) will be, in years to come, rediscovered as a masterpiece, just like with films like The Wizard of Oz (1939), Pinocchio (1940), Fantasia (1940), It's a Wonderful Life (1946), Sleeping Beauty (1959), 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), The Shining (1980), Blade Runner (1982), A Christmas Story (1983), Flashdance (1983), andJohn Carter (2012) before. As he said in an interview with Vulture Magazine, "It reminds me of a critic who called 'Flashdance' a 'toxic dump.'" "Ten years later [the critic] said, 'This is really a good movie. I missed it.' I think ['Lone Ranger] is going to be looked back on as a brave, wonderful film. I've been though this a lot with journalists. We made a movie years ago called "Flashdance" and I remember one journalist just giving us the worst review ever. Then, about five years later, we get this kind of love letter - that he totally "missed" it. That he loved the movie. And it's kind of the same with you that, any time it's on, you have to watch it. It happens, you know."

 

 

67) Pacific Rim: Today, WE ARE CANCELLING THE APOCALYPSE! 

 

 Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, or something like that.  Here we have GDT's attempt to be Michael Bay.  But there is only one Michael Bay so ultimately the film falls flat.  There are many good things about it but things like a mess of a script, horrible attempts at comedy and many of the fights between the monsters and aliens is shot too close so that you can't really tell what is happening. My main complaint with the visuals was the lighting; I felt it was too cartoonish and too much like a video game, with all the bright, oversaturated colors at night. There are some neat things in the film like some homages to films it may be trying to emulate, like the "Don't get cocky, kid." line which is a nod to Han Solo and Star Wars.  But ultimately this was an abitious failure.  I enjoyed some of it but not enough for it to be any higher than it is.

***Sidenote:  Tom Cruise was considered for the Idris Elba role.

 

[rukaio101]

Here we have GDT's attempt to be Michael Bay.

It's really not. And I'm not saying that as some sort of whiny 'Waah, how dare you compare GDT to Bay' fan. I'm saying that because I've seen several of the mecha anime that Pacific Rim is an homage to and I've seen Bay's Transformers and it's obvious which one Del Toro was emulating. Outside of the premise of 'giant CGI robots fighting' there is little-to-nothing in common with the ways in which Del Toro and Bay direct their action scenes.  

[baumer]

It's really not. And I'm not saying that as some sort of whiny 'Waah, how dare you compare GDT to Bay' fan. I'm saying that because I've seen several of the mecha anime that Pacific Rim is an homage to and I've seen Bay's Transformers and it's obvious which one Del Toro was emulating. Outside of the premise of 'giant CGI robots fighting' there is little-to-nothing in common with the ways in which Del Toro and Bay direct their action scenes.  

 

It's my write up.  

[rukaio101]

It's my write up.  

Very well then. I shall do my own write-up where I shall state that Michael Bay ripped everything off from Ed Wood and you shall be unable to argue! Wahahahaha!!!!

 

 

I need a hobby.

[baumer]

66) Oblivion:  Who are you?  What are you telling me?

 

The best way to describe this is that it's equivalent to cinematic fast food.  It's good while you are watching it but you kind of forget it soon after.  It's an existential adventure in the form of a sci-fi Tom Cruise movie. Self explanatory isn't it? The problem is it shouldn't. Tom Cruise has proved he can act, so why he opts for stereotypical roles makes one wonder. Well, not really.

Admittedly, there is some impressive cinematography/visuals and the music score is quite funky. That aside, there is no poignancy in the story line, no cohesiveness in its structure and ends up being just another piece of expensive junk.

This is a film I'm having trouble remembering much about.  So I'll just leave it at that.

***Side note:  This is Joseph Kosinski's second film he directed.  The first was Tron Legacy.

 

65) A Good Day to Die Hard:  Do you know what I hate about Americans?  Everything.  Especially cowboys.

 

I think I saw a different movie than the rest of the forum members here did. In fact, I have to ask what is wrong with some of you? While not a great film, it's not a bad one the way some of you are saying. I don't understand people's taste but then again, it did get a b+ cinemascore, so some people obviously liked it. The thing about Die Hard is that after the second one they became more of a popcorn film than a really serious good action film like the first two. This one continues the trend. I agree that it was much too far fetched. But if you are having fun, which I did, then you overlook that stuff.

The best thing about the film is the action. Director John Moore is apparently the devil according to the populace here. But he did Behind Enemy Lines and that was also a well made film. The action here lives up to the action in that flick. The opening car/tank chase in the middle of Moscow was breathtaking and Michael Bay would have been very proud. Then you have the entire finale in Chernobyl. It too was breath-taking...far fetched but breathtaking.

For an afternoon at the movies, I didn't feel cheated. It's not as good as the first two but it's still a good and fun film.

***Side note:  Bruce Willis was apparently paid 20 million for the film.  This means he has earned approximately 58 million dollars for playing John McClaine, which makes his demand for 4 million instead of 3 million on Expendables 3, all the more sad because of his greed.  

 

 

64)  Escape Plan:  You hit like a vegetarian.

 

There were maybe only a few misses in the screenplay but overall it was a really enjoyable ride. It seemed like Arnold enjoyed making it. This felt like an 80's action flick and for me, that's what I wanted to see.  One of the strengths of the film is that Arnold gets to play a character that doesn't seem like one he would normally play.  There is some vulnerability here and add Stallone's presence and the film seems to hit the right notes.   The pace was very good. The action in the third act was great, too.  Jim Caviezel was a bit over the top, kind of like Donald Sutherland in another Stallone prison flick, Lock Up.  

 

There were some great moments of humour as well, most notably when Arnold is allowed to go off on the warden by  speaking in his mother tongue while Stallone was exploring back of the prison.

 

There's still a much better Arnold and Sly film out there to be made, but for now, this one did just fine to whet our appetites.  

***Side note:  Bruce Willis was once attached to star with Antoine Fuqua directing.

 

[baumer]

63) Turbo: You certainly have the skills to pay the bills. If snails had to pay bills, that is.

 

Animations is not really my thing.  However this year, I enjoyed most of what I saw.  One of the reasons this was enjoyable is because of Ryan Reynolds voicing the main character.  I'll leave it at that.  Turbo is a good animated film.

***Side note:  Ryan Reynolds and Luis Guzman were also in the raunchy comedy, Waiting.  

 

62) The Purge:  Incoming reports show this year's Purge has been the most successful to date, the most murders committed.     

 

Instead of giving you a review of the movie, here is why the idea is an interesting concept:

 

The Purge is law.  It's not a choice.  You don't have to participate in the actual purge, but you are also not permitted to interfere with it.  In the film, the houses that support the Purge place a blue bouquet of roses or some kind of blue flower in their window or on their porch or whatever.  So this tells the people that they support the Purge.  In this dystopian future, the Purge is not looked upon as being Orwellian or dystopian, it is supported and loved by the masses.  So in essence what the kid did by letting in the homeless man is he broke the law.  He interfered with society's right to cleanse their souls.  Their right, by law, is to kill, rape, maim, beat up, torture and do whatever they want.  This one night it is their right.  There are not only laws to support this, but the people and the law view this as necessary to keep the rest of the year violence free.  This is why no one just goes to Canada for the day.  By leaving, they are not supporting the law and with that there would probably be consequences.

 

Now I'm obviously not saying that I support a dystopian and ridiculous idea like the Purge, just that in the context of the film, it's a very interesting and well executed film.

***Side note:  A sequel got greenlit after the opening weekend numbers were published.

 

 

61) The Family:  (Whispering to a party guest) You take all that silverware out of your purse and put it back before I break all your fucking fingers, capice?  

 

The plot is simple: a gangster takes his family into refuge in an obscure village in France from killers hired by a mob king pin put into jail in the US by evidence he provided. Despite eccentric behavior, animation-like violence and black humor, this family is the very model of love and care between its members. Some scenes are actually very touching.

 

Director Luc Besson makes a great attempt at a black comedy, but it's only mildly amusing. But there is a lot to like about the film, even if it is not hilarious from start to finish.  It's cute to see Dianna Agron smash a guy with a racket. And it's cool to see Michelle Pfeiffer blowing up the convenience store. Of course, Besson (and Executive Producer Martin Scorcese) is winking at us as Robert De Niro enjoys a showing of Goodfellas. But it's doesn't translate into a funny comedy. At best, there were a couple of chuckle worthy moments but again, it's still an enjoyable movie.  

***Side note:  Michelle Pfeiffer and DeNiro were in two films together previously, Stardust and New Year's Eve.  However in those two films they did not share any scenes.  When Pfeiffer received the script she told her agent that if there were no shared scenes with DeNiro, she wouldn't even read it.

 

[baumer]

60) Monster's University:  I found a nickel.  I sure wish I had pockets.

 

As I mentioned before, animation is not usually my thing.  I found the first half of this to be quite pedestrian.  But once they rip off The Hunger Games and Revenge of the Nerds, it got a lot better.  

***Side note:  John Ratzenberger makes another appearance in a Pixar film.  He has appeared in every Pixar film since Toy Story.

 

59) The Conjuring: You have a lot of spirits in here but here is one I am most worried about because it is so hateful.

 

I'm not sure if it might be because I've seen a billion horror movies, but it takes a lot to really impress me these days.  Films like The Ring and Blair Witch Project, Sixth Sense, Scream and Paranormal Activity all seemed to start a movement or a shift change in horror films.  And as good as Conjuring is, imo, it has been done before and been done better.  But again, that's not to say it isn't good because it is and a lot of that can be attributed to Wan.  He really did a great job making us feel fear.  But I think I knew what was coming before it happened and that kind of prevented me from being terrified of the film the way some were.  I'm glad to see so many horror films doing so well this year but The Conjuring didn't quite blow me away.  However, one horror film did and it will be mentioned later, much later in the list.

***Side note: Based on a true story.  Also, at the end of the film, when Lorraine gets off the phone with a priest, she says he wants to discuss a case with them that is out of Long Island. It's the Amityville Horror case.  

 

 

58) Wolverine:  The mutant has powers.

 

I liked it about as much as Man of Steel, but what makes it rank higher is the ending where Magneto and Xavier appear to speak with him, which sets up DOFP.  The middle really drags it down but the beginning and the end were great  But one of the big problems with the movie is that Logan becomes too mortal. And I just didn't like that.  It's like Rocky V when Rocky has to go back to being broke and living on the shitty streets of Philly.  I don't want him out of his element.  And Viper just seemed like she was invincible and yet when it called for it, she became easy to kill.

 

Enjoyable but not fantastic.

***Side note:  To bulk up for his role, Hugh Jackman contacted The Rock.  He told him he could gain about a pound a week by eating around 6000 calories a day, which consisted of almost all protein.

 

[baumer]

57) Kill Your Darlings:  Another lover hits the universe.  The circle is broken.

 

In Kill Your Darlings, Allen Ginsberg (Daniel Radcliffe) is the central character in a drama based on an actual incident that shows less of the beat poet's greatness as an artist and more about his nascent gay passions. From the above quote, Ginsberg's best friend, Lucien, has just kissed a stranger at a party and caught her plainness amid the signs of sophistication. So, too, does this film show the other side of literary glamour.

Nevertheless director John Krokidas and writer Austin Bunn evoke the tumultuous era of the early 1940's when the world collaborated in defeating the Nazis and young artists Jack Kerouac, William Burroughs, and Ginsberg were preparing to overthrow the moribund traditions of Victorian literature to create a hip-lit that made Ginsberg a god of mid-twentieth century letters.

While I would have liked more about Ginsberg and Kerouac as writers, Kill Your Darlings is nothing if not romantic queer lit of a high order. These bright boys evoke Whitman and Yeats as if they were neighbors, and the screenplay peppers the dialogue with enough cherished lines to make an English major rejoice.  I never really got into this time period of literature, even though I took lots of English in university.  So while I enjoyed the film, it was a little esoteric for me.

***Side note:  Chris Evans, Jesse Eisenberg and Ben Whishaw were originally cast in the three lead roles.

 

 

56) Kick Ass 2: Game on, cocksuckers.

 

This film was a lot of fun, It was not as good as the original but don't let that stop you from seeing it. There was less storyline and more action which some might like and others will dislike. This showed Hit girl in a different light old enough now to make her own decisions and struggling to deal with the decisions she has made. The Motherfucker character was so over the top but it worked most of the time.  The Russian was the only part of the film I absolutely hated as she was an invincible comic book character in a world and a film that is supposed to have real people without super powers.  

Perhaps the best part of the film is watching Mindy grow up.  She can still kick the shit out of you but she's also learning what it's like to be a teenage girl.  There are some tender moments in the film in between the blood and the carnage.  While Kick Ass 2 has a different motif than the first, the change works well.

***Side note: The lines "Try to have fun, otherwise, what's the point?" and "Yeah, there's a dog on your balls!" were both improvised by Jim Carrey.

 

55) Carrie:  If I concentrate hard enough, I can make things move.

 

I know there's a lot of people out there who will bash Kimberly Peirce's "Carrie," a 2013 remake of Brian De Palma's brilliant 1976 shocker of the same name - both of which are adaptations of Stephen King's first hit horror novel. I'm an admirer of "Carrie" (the 1976 version starring Sissy Spacek), so, like everyone else, I was highly skeptical of yet another pointless remake/reboot of an established horror classic. The remake is good, but it's no "Carrie" (1976). It's very much a product of today's time, with our culture's current obsession with technology - Facebook and YouTube figure prominently here - and yet it's still very much the same story, about a troubled girl, the titular Carrie White (Chloe Grace Moretz), a shy and repressed teenager who develops deadly telekinetic powers that she then uses against those who have tormented her.

 

The biggest difference here (and the film's greatest mistake, in my honest opinion) - other than the advances in special effects technology and more gore - is Carrie's gradual realization of her abilities and the potential danger they pose. The film treats this in such a way that they come about in a fashion reminiscent of any superhero movie you've probably seen in recent years.  It's the difference between a great remake and just a decent one.  Again, as mentioned in other horror reviews, this has been a good year for horror, just not an excellent one.  

***Side note:    Shailene Woodley turned down the role of Carrie, while Haley Bennett, Emily Browning and Lily Collins auditioned.    

 

[baumer]

Edited January 11, 2014 by Christmas baumer

[baumer]

And the countdown continues....