The Losers

3 out of 5 Stars



A group of five soldiers are sent on a mission to Bolivia. During the mission the colonel questions the given orders on account that there are children shipped into the target area. He takes matters into his own hands and heads in with his men to rescue the kids only to have the helicopter they are loaded into be blown up that was meant for them. The soldiers are now presumed deceased and work on finding a way to return to the states, reclaim their lives, and get revenge. Soon they have this chance when a mysterious woman helps smuggle them back in this story of revenge and conspiracy.

The Losers is a film with a story that is cliche and has been done time and again. It is another addition to the graphic novel/comic book movie genre and really is nothing new. When it comes to what is in the movie there is nothing to be excited about. The plot twists are also only surprising if you aren't looking for any. It's what we've seen before probably a hundred other times.

But the film is a fun ride. It's an action film with a little bit of humor thrown in. It's what other films this year should have been but failed at. The characters are enjoyable. It's easy to side with them. Ultimately the characters seem to vow revenge on the villain, Max, but there is also a sense of justice in that the colonel always remembers that Max killed 25 kids and that is part of why they are hunting this man. I don't think the film as a whole is that great. It's alright. But it's terribly fun to watch and kept me engaged the whole way through. It's a fun thrill ride. I love to think when I watch movies but sometimes I like to just sit back and be entertained. That's how I felt about this film and I was thoroughly glad that I saw it.

Death At A Funeral

2 out of 5 Stars



Death At A Funeral is based on the British version made just a few years ago. I didn't see the original but as far as I know they are basically the same in plot where a incredibly dysfunctional family comes together for a father's funeral and just about everything goes wrong.

As a whole this film is definitely not that good. The plot is truly mediocre and half the jokes aren't funny. It doesn't mean the film is absolutely horrendous. The cast is decent and there are some good laughs. The film really split into thirds almost. There is a third of gay sex jokes, a third of hallucination jokes, and a third of poop and everything else jokes. The only thing that is really funny is the hallucination jokes. That means about half an hour of the film. The rest is maybe a chuckle here and there but mostly groans and eye aversions.

Kick-Ass

2 out of 5 Stars



Dave Lizewski is a loser high school kid who has a dream to become a superhero. One day he decides to make a costume and fight crime, a plan that goes terribly wrong and puts him in the hospital but at the same time a whole bunch of metal is put inside his body which makes him feel little to no pain. He then continues his quest for justice and is soon met by the much more skilled Big Daddy and Hit Girl who are currently working on a plot to take down a crime organization and get revenge.

Kick-Ass is based on the graphic novel, which I've never read. But this film felt like it was supposed to feel like a superhero movie and instead feels like a teen comedy gone wrong with lots of language and violence. The "superheroes" are not inspiring and do the opposite of what they should when it comes to wanting to bring others to the party. And half of the characters aren't even heroes, just people dawning suits to get revenge. The last time I checked that doesn't follow the ethics of a hero. And of course the director has a sick sense of humor. All of the jokes involve death or gritty violence for the most part.

What I can give to the film is that the action scenes are fun to watch and the lead actors are able to carry their roles. But as a whole I found no redemptive value to this film and very little artistic merit. It's a fun and brainless entertainment action flick that I found disappointing.

Date Night

3 out of 5 Stars



Phil and Claire Foster have two kids, live in a suburban neighborhood, and all in all have a pretty mundane life. They have book club, get together with their friends, and have a regularly scheduled date night in which they do the same thing and go to the same place. Then one week Phil decides he wants to take his wife out to dinner in the city to do something different. Without calling ahead, he takes her to one of the most expensive and difficult restaurants to get into and not having a reservation takes another, a couple by the name of Triplehorn. This soon leads to them being escorted outside and soon learning that their decision has caused a hiccup in their plans, one that has put their lives in danger. Soon the Fosters are on the run trying to get home.

Date Night at times is fun. Mostly it's just decent storytelling with a good cast. It's a good idea with fun scenarios that unfortunately don't always live up to what they could be. Date Night is a comedy. Or at least it's supposed to be. About half the movie I found myself laughing, maybe less. Most of it I just tried to sit back and enjoy the ride. But I think that was the film's biggest flaw, it was made as a comedy. Most of the funny parts were in the trailer. Really it should have been a drama with comedy. I think it would have worked better. That doesn't mean that other people won't find it funny, but a lot of people I have talked to have also said that they have found the film to be not as funny as they expected.

If there is one thing I would personally praise "Date Night" for and in high regard, it is that the film is pro-marriage. Even though the Fosters don't necessarily feel happy all the time and their love life is plummeting, they work out their problems and stay together unlike some of their friends in similar situations. In a society where divorce seems to be the number one option a film with a couple that sticks it through is important. I enjoyed the film for what it was but not necessarily as a comedy. It was a mediocre film, nothing great. But it's a fun movie to just sit back and enjoy for the fun of entertainment.

Clash of the Titans

2 1/2 stars out of 5




When the story of a film is loosely based off a plethora of Greek myths there is a lot of leeway. Both the original and the remake follow many myths wrapped up into one story. In this version Perseus, the son of Zeus, is thrown into the ocean with his mother to die by the king. But Perseus survives and is raised by a fisherman. Years later when Perseus is now a man his family ends up sailing to Argos where the people have decided to defy the gods. Hades decides to let loose on the people and Perseus is the only one of his family to survive. Then upon arrival in the palace of Argos the queen decides to boast the beauty of Andromeda, her daughter, which leads Hades to plot against the humans and destroy Argos by unleashing the monstrous creature known as the Kraken. Perseus then ventures out on a quest to defeat the Kraken but only for the sole purpose of getting his revenge on Hades.

If there is one major thing I must say about this film is that it BARELY resembles the original film only made about twenty years ago. The remake is a revenge film with a shallow story, some great looking CGI, and a mighty lack of character development. When it comes down to it, even though it looks cool and there are a couple fun action scenes, the film is more epic than it should be. Characters were pulled from the original and thrown haphazardly into the script in various places where they hardly fit. The only character that seems to have any real meaning is Perseus and even then sometimes it is hard to care for him other then the fact that Sam Worthington is a pretty likable guy. But not much can really be expected from this nearly failed epic.

In the knowledge that this is a remake it must be understood why this version is so terrible in comparison. I would admit two things are better in this version; the effects and the action scenes. But that is where it stops. The original cast (for it's time) was just as good and the original story followed Perseus on a quest to defeat the Kraken to save the princess Andromeda. It was a story of heroism and chivalry, something noble. Although on occasion there was a character or two that might have seemed a little cheesy (namely Bubo the owl who has a cameo in the remake), the characters worked better in the story. In the original there was more a reason to Perseus' journey and something we could root for. In the remake we must suffer through what is thankfully less than two hours of modern day CGI action nonsense.

The other grand part of the original is that it housed one of the last great works of Ray Harryhausen, one of the greatest stop motion animators to ever work in film. Even though it is an older film the original still holds up even now because it focused more on the character and a decent story. Even the gods in the original feel like they have more purpose. And to think that I was truly excited for the remake. My advice would be, don't waste your money in theaters. If you decide to see it, wait until its on DVD. Better yet, just go rent the original.

The Last Song

2 stars out of 5




Two people meet somehow and somewhere on the east coast. Their relationship goes through major ups and downs before they decide to stay together and something terrible happens to the main character through the course of the journey. This seems to be what happens in almost every movie based on a novel by Nicholas Sparks. "The Last Song" is no different. One summer Ronnie and her brother Jonah are sent to her dad's house for the summer. Her parents are divorced and she is bitter about it, having let her life plummet in New York. During her stay on the east coast she slowly works towards reconnecting with her father and builds a romantic relationship with a young man who accidentally causes her to spill her milkshake all over her. Also, she used to play piano but ever since her dad left them she has given it up.

Remember that other film that was released this year based on a Nicholas Sparks novel called "Dear John?" This film is just as terrible. Perhaps part of the reason is because (as I have heard) that the filmmakers decide to venture a great deal from the source material. On the other hand, perhaps there is something about most Nicholas Sparks novels that just don't translate well to the screen. But no matter what it is true that "The Last Song" is a bore. The writing is mediocre. The film is paced slowly and it's hard to understand how two people can fall so quickly in love within a few days especially when one of those two despised the other to begin with. Of course anything is possible is the dreamlike hollywood land.

Even the acting was mediocre. Greg Kinnear couldn't even save his performance in this film and he is one of the few in the cast who has acting chops. When it comes to the others they are there for either romantic kissing scenes are tear inducing scenes that don't manage to produce emotions because it took so long to get there in the first place. One thing is for sure though. Miley Cyrus is definitely jumping away from her Hannah Montana days and moving up into the older teenage crowd. But she still has some work to do.

If there was something that redeemed this film it was the cinematography and the soundtrack. The film is littered with wonderful sunset shots and manages to capture the beauty of nature when it finally ventures away from the uninteresting characters. The soundtrack is filled with quality songs that are honestly too good for the material it is representing. In the end, though, the main thing I have to say is they should just stop trying to adapt Nicholas Sparks novels into films. All of the recent ones have been awful and feel exactly the same.

How To Train Your Dragon

4 stars out of 5



Hiccup is a viking who lives with other vikings on an island. Their island gets ravaged by dragons. The vikings kill the dragons. But not Hiccup. He is a scrawny and skinny lad who is too weak to kill a dragon. And of course his father is the chief. Then one night he manages to shoot down a Night Terror, the most feared and unknown dragon, with a net. He soon finds the dragon, helps fix its broken tail, gives it a name, and befriends, discovering that what vikings think about dragons may not be entirely true.

This is the fun new animated family film from Dreamworks pictures. How To Train Your Dragon packs good animation, good voice acting, and a great story. What seems like a simple idea becomes an epic story full of fun, action, and even a little bit of romance. What is best about this film, though, is how good a job it does at making people laugh. It also brings in moments that will cause the audience to want to cheer and cry as well and possible even have little ones jumping at a couple moments but not enough to give them nightmares.

Part of what I think makes this film work is the main character. He is an underdog and I think it's easy to root for the underdog because most people as the audience have been in the position at least at some point in our lives. Jay Baruchel does a good job voicing Hiccup even if at times we get a little of him in that personality. It still works, especially since everything is animated. Gerard Butler also does a good job as the father who is easy to detest and completely ashamed of his son. And the dragons of course are made a little bit more adorable so as night to frighten the children. It's a well told story and very clever and will entertain both children and adults alike.

There is one more thing I must mention, I didn't see this movie in 3D. In fact, it has come to the point that the advent of film is 3D and I don't think that most movies work in 3D. I was glad to see it in 2D away from all the attempted flash. And even storywise what I expected is what I got. It is based on a kid's book and I'm sure characters at moments could use more development but all in all it was what it promised to be; a funny family friendly film with some good action.

Hot Tub Time Machine

2 out of 5 Stars



Four guys go on a vacation to an old ski resort that three of them had stayed at back in the day. The fourth guy is Adam's (John Cusack) nephew. When they get there the town is now rundown, not what they remembered. One night they get in a time machine, spill an energy drink all over the console, and accidentally transport themselves back to 1986 and relive much of their past. The only other notable actors in the film are Chevy Chase as the mysterious hot tub repairman and Crispin Glover as the bell hop.

This film is a comedy. It is a comedy with a ridiculous premise that has hope for being funny. Instead it is quite the opposite expect for maybe a total accumulated fifteen minutes here and there but that doesn't make up for the other hour and a half. It's nothing but a concept movie that tries to be funny in itself by throwing the characters back into another time period and giving them lots of booze, drugs, and sex to deal with. At least some of the cast can act. Unfortunately this has to be one of the worst films I have ever seen John Cusack apart of. (I heard horrible things about 2012 but haven't seen it).

The idea of time travel has been utilized in so many ways in so many films, some in which were successful. The films that were successful also had plot and story. This film has neither. It also is far from funny ... that is unless you absolutely love sex jokes. That's what about two thirds of the film amounts to. Sure there are a few jokes that relate to the 80's and the advancement of technology but for the most part the jokes revolve around sex and a lot of things that happen are terribly random. It's taking this genre of comedy and mixing with science fiction with some decent and some good actors and creating a film that really has no redeeming value except for maybe the very slight message of sticking with friends.

If you love sex jokes you'll probably find this film hilarious but that by no means that is by any chance a quality film. It feels a lot like The Hangover and many people are saying that it's this year's The Hangover. The only problem is that in The Hangover things were just plain wrong while being hilarious. In Hot Tub Time Machine everything is just plain wrong.

Repo Men

3 1/2 out of 5 Stars




Repo Men is a new science fiction thriller set in the future. People are now able to buy mechanical organs to replace failed ones and if you can't afford up front than you're put on a payment plan. But if you fail to make payments after three months the company will come and reposses those organs under their own terms. Remy is one of these repo men, along with his friend Jake, who have been working together for years. Than one day one of Remy's job goes wrong and he winds up with a new heart from the company, causing him to question all of his past work.

Some people may find that this film looks familiar because concept wise it resembles Repo! The Genetic Opera which came out in 2009. But concept is where the similarities of these two films stop so I cannot condone the anger that Repo! fans feel towards the apparent rip off of this film. I am afterall, one of those Repo! fans. Repo Men however, has a different plot and completely different characters. It also feels very different. Repo! is a rock opera so it feels more like an art form and is therefore more fun. Repo Men is a gritty and intense thriller that is not always easy to watch.

Repo Men dives into the world of the morally and ethically gray and lives in a place where men should fear. This film brings us directly into the concept of repossesion in a horrific way. It is at times intense and quite bloody. Repossesion does require cutting people open after all. But it doesn't paint repossession in a good light, rather it points in the favor of human life and the main chararacters own redemption from what he used to do.

Repo Men is a finely crafted film. It isn't a film that everybody could sit through, in fact it's difficult to watch at times. I've seen a lot in films to the point where many would say I have been desensitized and near the end of the film I was cringing in my seat. But it keeps you on edge, wanting to know what is going to happen.

Most importantly is the message of finding ourselves. Remy points out at one point in the film that your job is who you are. You have to change jobs to change yourself. I think to some extent this is true.

The Bounty Hunter

2 1/2 out of 5 Stars



Milo Boyd (Girard Butler) and Nicole Hurley (Jennifer Aniston) are recently divorced. Jennifer is an investigative journalist, tracking down the truth of a suicide story. Milo is a bounty hunter deep in debt. Jennifer misses her appointment in court to appeal and ticket and quickly becomes a wanted felon for "assaulting an officer." Milo takes the bounty and soon comedy ensues as he tries to bring his ex to jail.

Not only does this film have a star cast, it is also clever and comedic. The premise alone is clever and fun. At the same time it could have been horrible but it was executed quite well. It also isn't everything expected. It is a comedy and with that the timing is wonderful, but it is also a mystery and romance. That doesn't mean that it's a romantic comedy, because it's not. The films leads do a great job in helping us believe their angst towards each other with both their shortcomings and successes.

What I enjoyed the most about this film though, outside of the excellent comedy, was the importance of admitting our wrongs in relationships and reaching common ground. It's a film that delves into the depths of the characters and because of this we feel for them, especially for those who have had relationships that have gone awry. But it's also a film that understands the flaws that we all have. Yet despite this two people can stay together and not always agree.

The Bounty Hunter definitely follows a few of the general guidelines of a romantic comedy but it also adds a few twists and aims towards both genders and is filled with moments of laughter.