Tomorrowland (2015)

Tomorrowland is of course a section of the Disney theme parks that used to depict what the future could like like. However as we eventually caught up to there predictions they had to redesign it. It now shows what people from the very distant past thought the future would like like that we now live in. Personally I liked the change, it was charming seeing what people though we could have. What the future could have been. When they announced a movie about Tomorrowland, I was simply confused. Would it show the possible future we missed like at the attraction, or a new future similar to most other science fiction stories? The end result was something I didn't really expect, and it held true to what I felt the attraction represents. It also gave us a pretty cool story that reminded me of something else entirely.

Bioshock is a video game franchise that is know for its science fiction stories and mediocre gameplay. In the first game you find yourself stranded in a futuristic city that is under water. They collected the best and brightest to build a perfect society. Sadly when you get there it is destroyed. The other games are similar, you get a brief glimpse of what could have been before being shown the truth. Tomorrowland starts out in a very similar way. I spent the first 20 minutes or so just thinking about how much like Bioshock it really was. I loved that aspect of it, I just wish they had kept the story dark in tone.

The movie starts with young Frank Walker trying to win 50$ with his almost functioning jet pack. He is turned away but he makes a good impression on a young girl named Athena and she gives him a pin and some very specific instructions. As he follows her and some other individuals onto the "It's a Small World" ride the pin is scanned and his boat is detoured underground to dark room with only a booth in it. The booth transports him into the future, or another world entirely and we are given our first look at this utopia that the best have created. This whole sequence was really the best part of the film for me. It was serious, but still fun. And everything about it felt familiar in a good way. The rest of the film takes place in our time and deals primarily with Casey Newton played by Britt Robertson.

Newton is a optimist, it is her defining characteristic. She is caught breaking into a NASA facility and is tossed in jail. Her father bails her out, and in her belongings is a pin. She does not know how it got there, and when she goes to touch it, she is transported to a field she does not recognize. This is where the main story kicks off. We find out her position in the real world is relative to the other world she is visiting. It was actually kind of neat seeing her maneuvering around the current world and then popping back and forth to see where she was in the other. It was a small attention to detail I really appreciated, until a few minutes later when they decided to drop it to make things easier. The actual story is her trying to figure out how to get to that world. In that quest she makes contact with a now older Frank Walker played by George Clooney. My wife swears he has never done a bad film, she also refuses to watch Return of the Killer Tomatoes with me. Walker has some sort of countdown going on, and refuses to talk about it. It is easy to see where this is going, and they of course have to stop it.

The movie had a very interesting story, I really liked the idea of it. The reveal at the end was well played to, however it was a Disney film and as such it was never able to fully explore the dark subject matter it was trying to utilize. It didn't come off as so much a missed opportunity, as it still did very well with what it had. But it just made me think about the Bioshock games and how great they did with the same story and set up. If you don't have anything else to compare it to, you would probably enjoy what they were serving you.

The effects were good, the future sequences made great use of this. Everything from the robots, to the rockets, the towers, they all looked fantastic. Yes they had the same issue the hobbit films had when they animated people, where they made them to cartoonish in their movements. There are multiple jet pack portions which looked awful because of this as well as a few scenes with the Athena character. However overall, I was very happy with how the movie looked and felt. The actual "Tomorrowland" was well done to. We got a version of it thought up as how they pictured it would look as well as the actual cookie cutter future we have come to expect. I thought it was a nice touch that they included the first version as it is what the theme park attraction is all about. While that is where the similarities end, seeing them incorporate the Disney stuff was kind of neat.

The ending was nice, I liked what they were trying to do with it. And it fit the overall theme of the movie which was never give up and believe that anything is possible. It was also the weakest part of the film because of this. It was to convenient and really never went into how it all worked. I wanted to see more of what the big event was, and how everything ended up working out how it did. It seemed like they gave us a cool start to a story, then showed the middle part. Then left the ending out, and instead simply gave us the last few pages to read and try to piece together.

The movie focused on the story of Newton and not Walker. But all the details we were given about Walker made me feel like that would have been the stronger experience. Without going into spoilers, we are given a very bare bones version of his story, and it plays heavily into Newton's. But his seems more compelling, and given the extra details I think the ending would have worked better. Walker has far more info then the viewer does and his story would have answered the questions I still had after the credits rolled. That is not to say this is a bad movie, but it was not the movie I wanted it to be. I mentioned the starting segment was my favorite part, I just wish they would have continued from there.

Good effects, a entertaining story, George Clooney and Hugh Laurie. Yes I had some issues with it, but I still enjoyed it. A good rental, but I would not buy it.

The Maze Runner (2014)

I remember a few years ago standing in a book store with my fiance. She was looking for books on Tarot for her mother, and I was bored out of my mind. I picked up a book and started reading the back of it. The story sounded interesting so I carried it around for awhile. After seeing my wife on the floor going through shelf after shelf, I figured I had time and started to read. The book was The Maze Runner, and it turned me off quicker then any other book I have ever read. Shank this, Klunk that, greenie greenie greenie. The book has its own slang, which I am guessing was to get around the kids constantly cursing. It just annoyed me how often it was used. It sounded stupid and I put the book back. Think I ended up with a comic or something. Hell I always end up with a comic book. That is just who I am. Years later the book is now a movie, and I had no interest in seeing it. That is until I saw it stared Dylan O'Brien from Mtv's Teen Wolf. If you have ever sat through a episode of Teen Wolf you probably remember Stiles Stilinski, the one good character the show has. Stiles is funny, and he seemed like a good actor from the only other thing I have ever seen him in. The first Time back in 2012. So after being told that the movie actually improved on the book, and had far less shank and klunk in it, I gave it a shot.

The story is simple. Every month a boy and some supplies are lifted into a enclosed area by a elevator. That area is surrounded by a maze. A society has been slowing forming for 3 years from the boys and is living off of the supplies and what they can find in the environment they were placed in. The live in a giant open field surrounded by jungle and stone walls. They send people called Runners into the maze ever day to try and figure out how to escape.

The movie follows Thomas, played by Dylan "Stiles" O'Brien, who is the new Greenie or new kid. He is curious about the maze, which is apparently unheard of. He becomes a runner and enters the maze and has far better luck then any of the others in solving the mystery. Bad things begin to happen once he starts progressing however. This is good for us, as the movie becomes rather action packed for awhile. We are introduced to the residents of the maze, and they are frightening. Giant mechanical spider monsters who ruthlessly kill the boys or infect them with some sort of disease that slowly kills them.

The action was actually something that took me off guard in the movie. The boys can't really fight the monsters as they don't have any effective weapons. They use sharp sticks and some small blades. So you know when they do try to fight back, it is not going to go well. I was impressed at how well they filmed those scenes how ever. Whether it was them running in fear through the maze, or actually trying to band together to take on the threat. It was always exciting, and it always looked visually interesting. The maze had to just be a huge green screen set, but it felt almost alive and looks imposing. The monsters were disgusting and looked pretty damn real most of the time.

One complaint I heard about the movie was the cast. Not that they were bad, because they weren't. But that it was mostly males, which it was. The movie has one female who plays a substantial role, and a smaller part played by another. The rest is all male, including all the major roles. It did create a odd atmosphere, and I could see why it would bother some. It didn't offend them or anything like that. Simply it just felt odd seeing a movie with a all male focus.

The acting was solid, nothing award winning but still quite good. There was no huge dramatic moments, and the guys and gal did great with what they had. I really liked the character Chuck played by Blake Cooper. He did a great job of getting me to really care about his role. Thomas Brodie-Sangster from Game of Thrones played the second in command Newt. Ki Hong Lee played Minho, one of the other runners. They both had larger roles and had memorable performances. The main antagonist other then the maze was Gally played by Will Poulter. He was a good pick for this role. He has a face that just begs you to punch it, which made him very easy to dislike. There really were not weak links in the cast, which helped the movie out greatly.

The ending is something you have to talk about to give a score, but I won't put any spoilers. I thought it was interesting, and frankly I had no idea what the movie was doing half the time. Since I stopped reading very early on, the maze was a big mystery to me. I enjoyed figuring it out along side them. And I liked that even though this is a trilogy, it still felt like a contained story.

The Maze Runner surprised me. It was a enjoyable film from beginning to end. It had good characters and a cool concept. It did its best to answer any questions it created, and the ending made sense. I actually thought of buying the 2nd book as soon as the movie was over. I didn't, but I did price it. For a rental, it is a solid choice. And if I had paid to see it in theaters, I would have left happy.

Dracula Untold (2014)

Dracula untold is advertising itself as a, well untold variation of the Dracula story. It tries to portray Dracula as a hero, and give a justification to his transformation into the Vampire itself. It also tries to paint Vlad the Impaler  as a sympathetic leader with high morals whom we should feel bad for. Now my research on either of those two subjects is very limited, or rather non existent. But from what I do know I had a hard time accepting either of those. Doesn't honestly effect the film at all, as it is fiction. But it was a odd choice for a story. Untold has a romance plot, and it is a story about family. The Turks demanded 1000 boys to add into their army years ago. Vlad was one of those and was raised alongside the now Sultan Mehmed. Vlad felt bad about all his actions and the whole Impaler thing, and returned to his people to rule Transylvania as a benevolent leader. Sadly all does not go well, and the Turks are provoked by the Transylvanians, albeit by no real fault of their own. They demand 1000 boys again, as well as Vlad's own son. Vlad does not like this and decides to meet with the Master Vampire played by Charles Dance, and ask for his power. Vlad is given a 3 day trial period. If he does not drink blood he will return to normal....oddly enough he dies in order to initiate the trial. Not sure if that means he would die at the end of the 3 days for good, or some how magically come back to life. Either way he uses vampire magic and abilities to protect his people, and even rallies them behind his new darkness.

The story behind the movie is passable, and honestly it does its job of setting up action. That is the entire draw of this movie, the fighting. You are not seeing a horror, a drama, or anything where you are expecting to be enthralled by a epic tale. You are hear to see Vlad kill some Turks, and look stylish while doing it. And for the most part it delivers in that regard. Vlad strolls into a huge group of enemies and just lays waste to them with his powers. The way they integrated the bat transformation looked great, and seeing him form into swarm and just fly around the battlefield was good fun. The effects were good, not amazing, but still well done. There were a few cheesy moments, but all in all there were very few complaints from that department. There is a scene where Vlad controls a huge hoard of bats and they mimic his movements by crating giant fists out of their bodies. It looked kinda funny and reminded me of that scene in the mummy where the sand was forming the Mummies body as it chased the heroes in the plane.

Sadly where the movie fails the hardest, is as a vampire flick. It is about Dracula, but we don't actually get to see any real vampire activity until the finally. Yes he has powers until then, but he is devoid of the ferocity and the animal instincts you come to expect from these creatures. Until the last few minutes you never see anybody feed. No blood sucking in a vampire movie, what is the point then? Also the final fight was laughable at best. Silver is a vampire weakness according to this, which seems to be about 50-50 with most vampire lore. So the villain tricks Vlad into fighting him in a room of silver. Vlad is then reduced back to the power level of a normal human, and gets progressively weaker as time goes by. I guess it makes sense, but it once again detracted from what I wanted from the movie. Vampire violence. Final fight, Vlad has given in and is now Dracula. I wanted to see him rip the Sultan apart, not struggle with him for a few minutes before somehow just overcoming the silver weakness because of love.

The movie is at its strongest when it is not dealing with vampires. Vlad is likable, and I was able to understand his motivations and even agree with what he was doing. The family aspect and him wanting to save his son over protecting his people was interesting. And then when they turn on him and he tries to restore the balance by protecting them was noble. But I couldn't help but feel it would have worked better if they explored the darker side of the story more, instead of trying to turn Vlad into this amazing great guy. I get that Vampires are "hip" right now, but that doesn't mean we have to make everything about them a love story.

Acting was good across the board. Luke Evans was a good Vlad, and he did alright with the action sequences. Sarah Gadon played his wife Mirena, and she managed that well enough. The character was pretty unlikable by the end, but that wasn't Gadon's fault. Dominic Cooper always plays smug well, and is easy to dislike in pretty much every thing. I think it has to do with his face, but that may just be me. The weakest performance was probably by Game of Thrones actor Art Parkinson who plays Vlad's son. But hey he is young and still learning.

So let's wrap this up. Story is passable, but not great. Action sequences are enjoyable for the most part, but does have some cheesy sections that made me shake my head. Vampires were severely underused, and the film never really felt like it utilized the Dracula property to its fullest. The ending was awful, in many ways I can not explain with out spoiling more then I am willing to. But hey it had a cool line near the end. I am Dracula, son of  the devil. I would have used that as a the tagline for the film. Dracula Untold: Son of the Devil. Or Dracula Untold: The legend is born. Honestly, which one of those sounds like a movie worth seeing?

Knights of Badassdom (2013)

Knights of Badassdom is a movie that simply put, it not for everybody. Honestly it might not be for a lot of people, which does work against it. However if you can look past the silliness, the poor effects, and the subject matter of the film, there is actually something really great here. I would say if you are interested in this one, go into it with lower expectations then you probably have. The Director of the film is not pleased with the final version, mostly due to how much it has changed from what was originally intended. The financiers did not care for the original cut, and basically refused to put the film out unless they got control over how it was put together. What we are now given is their cut of the film, and it is not one without issues. The reasons given for this, was hopefully to make the film appeal to a larger audience, but honestly I think it had the opposite effect.

The story at its core, is a about a break up. Joe (Ryan Kwanten) has just been dumped by his girlfriend. Her reasoning made no sense to me, as she was upset he lived with his friend who was a millionaire, and more then happy to fund Joe's life. Joe just writes heavy metal songs, has his dream job, and lives in a castle with his 2 best friends. Honestly how is that not the perfect life? But his girlfriend wants more from him, she wan'ts him to change his life to fit what she thinks is the proper mold. Joe is saddened and his friends Eric (Steve Zahn) and Hung (Peter Dinklage) abduct him, and bring him to a weekend long LARP event without his consent. Before we continue I would like to point out weekend long LARP events are a real thing, and I am pissed off nobody told me this before now. As Joe has not played in years, his character is considered dead. They have to do a resurrection ceremony to revive him, and Eric being a level 26 Wizard is the guy for the job.

*LARP is Liave Action Role Play. Basically imagine Dungeons and Dragons but played out in real life. People get in costume, decide on classes and jobs, and make large foam weapons. They then have actual fights and large scale battles with each other. Having never actually experienced it myself, it looks like the best thing ever. Back to the story....

Eric uses a old book he bought off of ebay, written in a language he doesn't understand, because it makes the spell sound cooler. He also sings it, well because it makes it more entertaining for us. The spell book turns out to be real, and they instead summon a Succubus into the world. She starts killing off the gamers, and our heroes have to use there medieval skills to defeat her.

If you are wondering if this movie is for you, let me ask you this. Did you know what LARP was before, and does it interest you? Do you like Metal, and do you think it could be used as a script for casting a spell? Does seeing Peter Dinklage in full LARP gear, high on shrooms teaming up with Danny Pudi (Abed from Community) sound awesome to you?

Let me talk about Peter Dinklage for a moment. I don't watch Game of Thrones, it is not on hulu and I don't have cable. I have read the books though, and I have seen many clips on youtube and other places. Dinklage is one of the high points from what I have seen, and he continues that trend in this movie. He is the main source of comedy, and you can tell he really had a great time filming this. We see him running around with his swords screaming at the top of his lungs. He really just gets into it, and comes off over the top, but in a good way. Add in that his character is on druges the whole film, and it just takes it up to another level. We see him trying to act like a badass one moment, then putting flowers in his hair the next. Other stand out roles were Danny Pudi, who could have used more screen time, but was entertaining none the less. Summer Glau played one of the main roles, and while she didn't really do anything to make her stand out, she was by no means bad in this. Steve Zahn was about what you would expect from his previous work. He was humorous, and did well as one of the main focus points of the film. He does not come across as one of the strongest actors in the film, but he greatly fits his role. He really does seem like the kind of guy who would spend his weekends out in the woods playing these games. I think he was a great casting choice.

The special effects in this movie range from good, to god awful. The Succubus kills people in gory fashions, and that always looked great. However the later half of the film includes a demonic presence that is comprised entirely of CGI and just looks awful and fake. There is also a huge showdown at the end, which should have easily been the strongest scene in the film. Ryan Kwanten sings a heavy metal ballad to summon a undead Warrior to fight the Demon in a duel. Honestly that line alone would have gotten me to buy the dvd, so it is a shame it looked so fake when it does happen. Still a great scene and good fun, but it was not as good as it easily could have been.

A cool idea for a film with some minor issues. A directors cut is a dream of mine, though I don't know if we will ever get one. Peter Dinklage kills it and makes every scene he is in infinitely better. The movie uses a cast that will appeal to its core audience, people who know who Summer Glau is, and portrays LARPing in what I consider a positive way. Ryan Kwanten won me over, and while he is not actually singing those songs, he owns that last scene with his performance. Knights of Badassdom is not a horrible movie, it is just a missed opportunity. What we receive is likely the only version we will ever see. While it is different from its intended form, that does not mean there is nothing to enjoy here. Give it a watch, have some laughs, and just enjoy it for what it is. A decent film about why being a nerd is not a bad thing.

47 Ronin (2013)

This was a odd film for me, it was one I was really interested in at one point. But then after more an more news came out, my interest very quickly died off. It went from being a day one viewing, to a redbox rental pretty much over night. Now that I have finally seen the film, I can say I may have been to harsh on it. However many of my fears were justified, and the end result was far from the original film it was intended to be. Some back story on this, 47 Ronin is a true story. That being said this movie goes way off tracks from the truth. Originally though, not so much. The film was written by a Chris Morgan and directed by..well somebody else. The original story had Keanu Reeves character Kai, in the film very little. He was a secondary role, where as Oishi played by Hirouki Sanada was the main lead. My understanding is the film was pretty much done, but the higher up didn't like that it stared a Asian actor that most people were unfamiliar with. They wanted Reeves to be the lead, and had them do many re-shoots to establish this. This also greatly changed the story and the overall film, to the extent the Director either Walked or was Fired depending on which site you are reading. I will talk more about this later, but it plays such a huge role in why the film did not manage to reach its full potential.

So the story of the 47 Ronin? Their Lord Asano Naganori was tricked into attacking a court official Kira Yoshinaka. His punishment was death, and he was stripped of all his lands. This lead to all of his samurai becoming Ronin, or a masterless samurai. According to wikipedia, the modern day equivalent of a Ronin in japan, is somebody who lost their job. There is far more to it then that, but it should give you a idea. Kira, who was behind the death of Asano, was given no punishment. Asano was allowed to commit Seppuku, a form of suicide that retains honor. His men saw the injustice in this and plotted in secrecy to kill Kira for his part. The 47 were not simply out for revenge, but were hoping the Shogun would return the families lands and thus give the other Ronin back there title. In the movie this was not the case. Asano was tricked into attacking the Official by witchcraft. He was not stripped of his lands, but his samurai were made into Ronin. His daughter was then given to the Official as a wife in order to join the two families. She is also in love with Reeves character Kai. The idea behind the movie is not about saving the other Ronin and bringing back their honor, but simply Killing Kira to keep him from marrying Asano's daughter.

So the story is kind of a mess, it had a strong structure to build off of. But ended up going for something much less meaningful. Reeves plays Kai, a half asina man who was raised by Tengu, or demons. Asano takes him in as a child and raises him. However as he is a foreigner, and referred to as a half breed, he is unable to have a title or rank. He is looked down on by everybody, but the movie focuses on Oishi the most. This is because Oishi was originally the lead, and we are supposed to be seeing his journey. After Asano's death, Oishi joins up with Kai and puts the past behind him. The Racism towards Kai is a constant in the film. Though eventually the Ronin do accept him, after he does pretty much all the work getting ready.

So since the story isn't great, how does the rest of the movie hold up? The writing was weird, but not bad. The movie starts off with a big scene, but the next few are slow. They try to establish the different roles, and bring some emotion to the screen. However they don't really get you to connect to the different characters. It ends up just feeling drawn out, and leaves you waiting for the next bit of excitement. The acting wasn't bad, but it rarely excelled. The movie seemed to be relying on its CGI and battle sequences to get it over. In some regards this worked, but the inconsistency of the CGI was baffling. We had a really cool looking creature in the opening scene, followed up by some very horrible looking Tengu later on. Some of the CGI looked almost real, some looked laughable. The battles were no better. The fights between the Samurai were entertaining, however when Reeves starts to use his Demon abilities it all falls apart. Also the final fight between him and the witch was just awful.

Back to the re-shoots. There are multiple times in the film where you can tell Reeves was a afterthought. Group shots of the Ronin with no white man in sight, then a line delivered by Reeves as he is the only person in the shot. It is odd and really seems out of place. I can understand them wanting a established actor having a larger presence, but it really does detract form it. His journey is not all that interesting, and he only wants the girl. Oishi who is fighting for something much greater is pushed to the side, and often overlooked. However the ending to the film did focus on him. And he was given the final fight against Kira, even if it was greatly overshadowed by the lesser fight between Reeves and the witch. The ending was actually the strongest part of the film. Even if it did a poor job of explaining why it ended the way it does. You will remember that part of the film, far greater the rest of it.

In the end I can't say I hated 47 Ronin. While it reeked of missed opportunities, it still delivered some good action. And I love a good asian film, it is something we don't get enough of here. While those who are aware of the history of the film will outright hate it, those who are not should be able to find something enjoyable in it. I particularly liked the witch in most of her scenes. Played by Rinko Kikuchi who you may recognize from Pacific Rim. If you didn't make that connection don't feel bad, I have seen Pacific Rim multiple times this year and had no clue until after the fact. Much like Reeves, the Rinko felt like she should have been used less in the film. However she was usually pretty crazy, and added some unintentional comedic moments.

The battle scenes were for the most part entertaining. And seeing the 47 sneak into Kira's house was very enjoyable. With a strong ending, and some cool sets, there were high points to the film. In the end it feel greatly short, but I didn't regret the $1.25 I spent to watch it.

No lego trailer for you today. Sorry

The Hobbit: Desolation of Smaug

So after owning this movie for a while, I finally managed to make time to watch it with the wife. Three hours of free time, with a 1 year old and conflicting schedules, can be a bit tough. Not to mention a lack of excitement after the first Hobbit film. Did the 2nd one manage to raise the bar for the franchise? Or did it falter every time it started to pick up, much like the original.

The story for this movie, is basically the same as the first. They are trying to get to the mountain to claim the arkenstone, which would allow the leader of their company to claim his place as King under the Mountain. Or basically King of where the dragon is....not the best thought out plan. The big difference, is this one has them finally getting to the mountain. And then going, on crap there is a dragon here. Why did we not plan for this occurrence? If you read the book, you know what happens after that. If not, well the ending to this film will either piss you off or make you smile. Much like the original, there is no finality in the ending. And it sets up the third movie in a way that makes you wish you could dive right into it. Or at least see how that final scene plays out.

On the way to the mountain though, the Company meets with many mishaps and disasters. If you read the Hobbit, you know it is a book about Bilbo pretty much saving everybody over and over again for most of the story. Honestly the Dwarfs seem to just get in the way, or screw everything up. The movies have gone out of there way to lesson that effect, and make them all seem meaningful. In the first one, they did somewhat accomplish this, but in this film they go in a different direction. They included Legolas played by more of a cartoon then Orlando Bloom. Hobbits in trouble, people are dying? Legolas shows up and kills the opposition. There is a line about there being 40 orcs between them and their goal. Legolas seems scared, and I am thinking, haven't I seen him kill more then that in this film already? Bilbo still comes out looking like competent, but Legolas was a forced inclusion that backfired for me in a big way. Also as he is younger in these films then Lord of the Rings, they used CGI to alter his appearance. You got a fake looking person, who was more creepy then anything else. Which leads me to my next point....

CGI in this film was for the most part, better used then in the first. The first film had multiple scenes where everybody became CGI for a few seconds. They were accompanied by over the top movement that just ripped me from the immersion and ruined a few of the bigger scenes for me. In this movie they seemed to have toned those moments down. There were times you could tell when cgi was being used, but overall it was much more subtle. Also CGI Legolas made me worried about how Smaug would look, but it was a meaningless fear. The dragon looked great, and was a high point of the movie. He had this great effect where his belly would light up before he shot fire. You could see it travel up his chest and through his neck before he fired it off. Great work all around on him, and Benedict Cumberbatch was a great addition as his voice. It is sad to say, these movies will never look as good as the LoTR ones given they are coming out years after. But this one was a step in the right direction.

Additions to the movie, or stuff that was not in the books. It is a common thing to do in these cases, but the Hobbit does seem to go further then most. I guess when you are trying to fill the same amount of screen time as the 3 LoTR novels, with a single book shorter then any of those, it has to happen. They were smart by adding in stuff from other Tolkien works, but as with using Legolas, there are always some missed. One of my favorite additions was the female wood elf Tauriel played by Evangeline Lilly. She was a character created for the movie, and her story really added to it in a positive way. Legolas, who was not in the books was the opposite for me. He felt forced, and was used multiple times as a out for a problem that they had created usually by also going off the text. They had a showdown at the end that was laughable, and was meaningless. Without ruining anything, just try not to take it to serious. They also added a lot more to the Bard character, I think that will end up a positive when we get to the next film though.

So for a fun kids book, we get a pretty aggressive and somewhat violent film. Not a bad one, but not a great one. I still pull out my LoTR blue ray set every few months, I will probably never watch this one again. That says a lot right there. While some of the changes worked well, others did not. And it felt like at times they were simply padding the running time. Still the movie has some strong moments, and while it downplays its own main character, it raises others up higher then the book ever did. If you enjoyed the first, you will enjoy this one. If the first one bothered you, well this one won't fix that. It shares many of the same issues, though it does try to address at least one of them.

And a lego version, because I wish I could do that.

Thor: The Dark World

Thor is kind of a odd hero for me. Much like Superman, I never really cared for or enjoyed him in the comics. The first Thor movie was okay, but not something I really enjoyed. Given how little I had seen on the new movie, I did not go into it with high hopes. After Marvel made the avengers movie though, I figured I would have to give this one a shot. I liked Thor in that movie, so maybe they would find a way to win me over with Dark World. It feels kind of weird to say it, but the thing I was looking forward to the most was the after the credits stinger.

So did the movie win me over? Well it was certainly different then the first one. They had a much smaller scale story with far less going on. They had less characters and focused more on Thor the God then Thor the man. The changes did seem to work in its favor though, and really created a better overall flow. I don't think the Thor movies will ever be at the level most people tend to put the Iron Man ones, but this was a good step forward for the franchise.

The story is based on Malekith the Dark elv. There is a artifact that will allow him to destroy the nine realms, earth is one of them, but it can only be used for a short window of time. The movie starts with some history, and shows the Dark Elves fighting the Asguardians led by Thor's grandfather. Malekith tries to activate the weapon, however the Asguardians are able to hold him off long enough that the chance passes by. They win the fight, but Malekith sacrifices his army in order to allow himself to escape. The weapon is hidden, and remains so for years. Skip to present time and to Jane Foster, Natalie Portman's character. The 9 realms are aligning themselves, which is what causes the weapon to activate. It also causes rifts to open up on the different worlds creating weird events. One allows Jane to find the weapon, which alerts Malekith and he sets off in search of it and her.

Most of the story revolves around Malekith trying to destroy the realms. By focusing on a single event the story actually comes off feeling much tighter then the original movie did. Thor is able to focus solely on what is ahead of him instead of dealing with that and trying to adjust to midguard or earth. Plus once the action starts, and the story takes off, it really doesn't slow down to much. The movie had a good pacing throughout, and it didn't have any real problem areas or weak scenes that I can think of. I even enjoyed the Humor, Chris Evans cameo was a stand out moment. As was seeing Thor forced to use public transportation due to loosing his ability to fly.

The effects were good, but honestly we have come to expect that from Marvel. They have the money and ability to make everything look damn good if they want to. The elves have these black hole grenades that were easily the best effects in the movie. They toss them, and then the grenade creates a black hole sucking up everything around it. They looked fantastic, and caused by far the coolest death in the movie. Everything else was top shelf as well, from the ships to the portals. I am sure there is something to complain about here, but I didn't catch whatever it was. And with Guardians of the Galaxy coming up, where at least 2/5ths of the team is cgi, I am very confident about how well they will end up looking.

So this is a action movie, how did the fights turn out? Hit or miss in some areas, but always entertaining. Most of the action looked great, and all of the battles ended up coming across positively. That being said, Thor's fighting style does not always end up looking that good on screen. Some of his hammer shots just looked bad, and seeing the Dark Elves stop firing there guns long enough for the Asguardians to close into melee range was infuriating. I understand a close range battle is more fun to watch, but it looked horrible how they transitioned into it. The final battle though was fantastic, and really closed out the film in a strong way. The realms are all coming together so there are portals everywhere, and the battle takes place across multiple worlds on different fronts. It really was a cool concept, and it was executed greatly.

While the first movie had a strong focus on Thor and Foster, this one really doesn't. They do have a few scenes were they try to focus on the relationship between then, but most of the movie doesn't deal with it. I felt that was the right choice here. Instead of seeing Thor deal with his feelings, and his desire to stay on earth, we get a movie about him flying around and beating people up. But we still get some closure on the romantic front, so it is kind of a best of both worlds thing.

So Thor: The Dark World. Action was good, story was enjoyable and had some solid humor. The effects were impressive, and I enjoyed the direction they took the Thor character. Was this a better movie then the first? Absolutely it was. My only real disappointment with it was that I waited until redbox carried the movie to see it. I may still not care for Thor in the comics, but the movie Thor has my support now. And that is something I did not expect to say going into it.

Frozen

Frozen is a new Disney film staring Kristen Bell, Jonathan Groff, and Josh Gad. Oddly enough, I hadn't really seen any advertising done for the film. So it was kind of nice going into it with no real knowledge or expectations. After quite a few previews, and as many amc adds....why advertise the theater I am already in? After all that, the movie began, except not. You are treated to a Mickey Mouse short that frankly could have been removed and I would have been happier. I am not sure if it was included due to Pixar usually doing something, but it fell flat and started the movie off with me annoyed. This brings me to another point, the sound. The sound was awful at the theater I saw it at. The Universal Studios theater. It sounded all filtered and distorted. I know this is not the movies fault, so I will not hold it against it. But since it was a movie with lots of singing, understand that is why I don't really spend much time on that section.

The story, with minor spoilers, is that Anna and Elise are princesses of some land with a name I don't remember. They are very close as children, but over the course of a musical number we see that all change. Elise has magic powers that allow her to create and control ice and snow. Afraid of her hurting her sister with her powers, the parents decide to seal off the children from the world. They raise them separately  and they no longer interact with each other. The main story kicks in when they are older and Elise is becoming queen. After finally seeing her sister again, Anna gets carried away and angers her. Elise looses control of her powers and sends their kingdom into an eternal  winter. 

Voice acting is very different from regular acting. It requires different talents and skills. I don't recall Kristen Bell doing voice work before, so it was very nice to see she took naturally to it. From what I could tell, she also did well with the singing portions. Her character Anna was the main role in the movie, and Bell was fantastic. The person who surprised me though was Josh Gad. I had no clue who he was going into the film, but his role as Olef the snowman was a show stealer. He does a musical number about how he wants to see summer, so he can finally do whatever it is snow does when it gets hot. Between his dopey but lovable demeanor, he easily had some of the more humorous and memorable parts. Groff also did well, but other then one musical portion, his character really doesn't stand out much. 

Sound...yeah. Music sounded like it was all well done, and a few of the numbers were very clever. Nothing really stood out as just being bad from what I could tell. Oh if you see it with your family or friends, make sure to ask them who voices the reindeer with a serious face. Don't worry, you will know when the time is right to ask.

Animation was pretty good in this one. It was done in a similar style as Tangeled or Brave. The people looked rather realistic, but the faces are often done in a more exaggerated manor. It seems like it allows for a wider range of emotions, but that could also be just in my head. The snow was cool though, and the magic stuff was impressive to see. You expect a certain level from a big Disney animated film, and this one easily met it. Seeing Elise manipulate her surroundings was always enjoyable.

The story overall was decent. Seeing the sisters trying to deal with their issues was a nice change of pace. While it wouldn't be a Disney movie without a romance subplot, this one felt unique enough to stand out. It never takes the main stage, and it didn't feel forced. The sound was hard to gauge, but I think everything was good with it. And the voice work was animated and enjoyable. Great animation quality, and cool magical visuals to round everything up. Honestly I enjoyed this movie more then I thought I would. It is a great date night movie if your lady is into these kind of films. And a great family movie that I think both male and female kids would enjoy. Hell, I can even say as a almost 30 year old male that I enjoyed the musical princess film.