Ancient History and Ancient Aliens

Well I'll admit, I don't particularly have anything too creative to come up with when it comes to a title with this post. So, I'll just state that this is a double review for two different films I saw two days in a row. But, for the first time in quite some time (if not ever), I saw them both in theaters! Hooray overpriced tickets and heavily buttered popcorn!

Alien criminal Boris the Animal has escaped his maximum security prison on the moon, intent on taking revenge on the man who imprisoned him and cost him his arm 43 years ago; Agent K of the Men in Black. He intends to do this through the means of time travel, and it falls upon the duty of Agent J, K's longtime partner, to travel back to 1969 himself and prevent history from being altered for the much, much worse.

I love the very first Men in Black. It's a perfect blend of action, comedy, and general sci-fi geekiness that rubs me just the right way. Okay, I admit that sounded a bit bizarre, but bare with me throughout these reviews today. I'm not quite sure what happened with the sequel though, as I thought it felt lazy, boring, and was just all around uninteresting, with nothing to offer except for a pug in a tuxedo and Lara Flynn Boyle in her underwear (admittedly, both not bad things, but when they're the ONLY good parts of your movie, you might have messed up). I was quite nervous when the news of a new MIB film being written, directed and filmed made the way to the internet and assorted movie news sites, as I'm sure most were.

Thankfully, this installment does everything right that the second film did wrong, and even brings things full circle in a way that I didn't think was possible. If you missed the great interactions between Agents J & K from the first film, you'll get your fill here with two equally great performances from Josh Brolin (the younger K) and Tommy Lee Jones (the older K). Brolin's impression of Jones isn't a complete impression, seeing as how this also may provide an insight as to how and why K acts so stoic and serious post-1969, but it is certainly one of the best things to take away at the end of the day. Will Smith looks like he's having a blast too, which I can't say was too surprising seeing as how the original film helped make him into the mega star he is today and he hasn't acted in anything for nearly 3 years prior to this film's release. The rest of the cast is pretty solid too, with Emma Thompson as new head chief Agent O being an absolutely wonderful addition to the franchise. Rip Torn's Zed is sadly deceased according to the film's opening 10 minutes, which I assume is due to Torn himself either turning down the role or not being well enough for filming. Sadly, there are a few other familiar faces that are absent from the film as well, like Jeebs the Alien and Frank the Pug (the latter's actor is deceased, so that may be understandable), but you'll quickly get over it. As for the main villain, I felt a bit conflicted. I like Jemaine Clement, but I thought Boris could have been funnier and been given a little bit of better dialogue. Casting Nicole Scherzinger of the Pussycat Dolls as his "girlfriend" also seemed to serve as more of an excuse to say "Hey! Look who we got to make out with this ugly guy!" That being said, the cameos that you do spot in here ARE pretty darn amusing.

The film's also got some very well done special effects (courtesy of the usually bad ass Rick Baker) and cinematography, though it gets a tad bit messy midway through it's running time. It's a minor complaint though, and it certainly isn't as headache-inducing as something like the Transformers films can be. The work done on Boris is pretty darn impressive too, considering it apparently took over 4 hours to apply Clement's makeup. He was damn near unrecognizable, save for his voice, which was eerily reminiscent of Tim Curry this time around. Danny Elfman's catchy and memorable score returns as well, albeit slightly tweaked, but still reminding you of the strange and fun universe that you're stuck in.

Overall, this sequel is about as much fun as you would hope it'd be, and will mercifully erase most of your bad memories caused by the second film. Seriously, that movie was just....weak. Men in Black 3 though, is anything but weak or bad in my mind. I had a fantastic time.

Unlike the NEXT film I have to review though....

In 1818, a young Abraham Lincoln witnesses his mother being attacked in the night by Jack Barts, the plantation owner who employs his father. When his mother dies from the attack days later, and his father confesses that Barts poisoned her, Abraham waits nine years to plot and exact his revenge, but is overpowered by the supernatural Barts, who is revealed to be a vampire. Thankfully, Lincoln is saved by a mysterious stranger named Henry Sturgess, who convinces the soon-to-be president to train in the art of hunting the foul beasts, and ridding the earth of them.








I'll just start off this review with one simple sentence:

If you heard of the concept for this, be it the film or the novel that it is based off of, and scoffed at it or scorned it, then I can not convince you to see it.



Me? Well...I really dug it.


Okay, so I lied above. But then again, so does the title character throughout a decent portion of the movie. Kind of goes against the whole "Honest Abe" part of history that so many know about doesn't it? That's the beauty of Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter though, a film that knows it is completely absurd and completely historically inaccurate, but plays it with such a serious face and good nature that it was hard to dislike for this unabashed geek and lover of B-cinema.

Firstly, I must give praise to the action sequences, especially in the film's first half. This contained some of the very best fight scenes I've witnessed in an American film in quite some time, with the highlight undoubtably being a chase and battle sequence that is stuck in the middle of a stampede (horse lovers might cringe a bit though. Sorry mom). While I thought some of the camera work seemed disorienting at times, the sheer amount of good thought and creativity put into the fights themselves makes it all worthwhile. There is a good atmosphere set throughout the film too, with good use of lighting and fog.

The cast is all fairly solid, with Dominic Cooper (from last year's Captain America and The Devil's Double) and Benjamin Walker (Kinsey) being the highlights for me. Mary Elizabeth Winstead plays Mary Todd Lincoln, and does a respectable job, though part of me wonders if she knows she's just giving us nerds even more of an excuse to worship the ground she walks on. Anthony Mackie (The Hurt Locker), Jimmi Simpson (Liam McPoyle from It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia!), and Alan Tudyk (Firefly, Dodgeball, Tucker and Dale vs. Evil) also show up in the supporting cast and deliver rather fun performances. I'd say the weaker aspects of the film fall upon it's main villains though, who were more unremarkable than they were terrible. It's a shame too considering how much I liked Rufus Sewell in Dark City, but that film came out fourteen years ago. In addition to some rather vanilla villains, the film does lose a bit of luster after Lincoln is elected President, but it thankfully picks up steam after that particular lull in the script. Finally, there are some minor plot holes that the most "nitpicky" of folks will no doubt have a field day with, but may I remind you, you ARE paying money for/downloading a film called Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter.

And that's just it, I knew what to expect. I will reiterate what I stated above: if you rolled your eyes at this film's existence, or said anything along the lines of "That looks fucking DUMB," you are not the target audience for this film. If you're not afraid to let your geek flag fly, or just kick back and have a good old fashioned cheesy time, you should be willing to dedicate some of your free time to this undead-hating Republican. As for Abraham Lincoln vs. Zombies, well, I might have to get back to you on that one.

Okay, in actuality, I don't think I'll ever get to you on that one. I despise the Asylum.

Prometheus Review

In the year 2089, a group of scientists and archaeologists have unearthed a "star map" which connects multiple ancient cultures, including those foreign to that of mankind. They set out on board the spaceship codenamed "Prometheus" in search of who left the map for humanity to discover. This may lead to the origins of mankind itself, or it may lead to our own demise...




Alright, I'm absolutely SURE you're familiar with this film by now. The marketing has been near impossible to miss, and this is director Ridley Scott's first foray back into the science fiction genre since Blade Runner. Heck, it's even a prequel (though he himself won't officially state it) to his 1979 classic Alien. But does the film live up to all that monumental hype and anticipation? Well, yes and no.

(Note: I will NOT try and spoil anything for this review)

Now, before we get things started, yes this DOES have a connection to Alien, despite what Scott himself might say. You'd have to be either blind or have never seen the original film to argue it. There are nods aplenty to it scattered throughout, and those with a keen eye and good memory will be able to spot them. The special effects and visual effects in this are absolutely astonishing at times, as is some of the cinematography. There is a certain mix of fascination and hesitation that is prevalent without being too overbearing or discombobulating. The moments of suspense and horror that pop up may perhaps shock you or at the very least, make you cringe in your seat. Exploring a unique mythology in a universe that constantly surprises you almost makes you able to ignore the film's shortcomings.

This brings me to the main flaws with Prometheus, and that is the script. There are no real gripes with plot holes, nor are there any with the acting. My main problem was the characters, or rather, lack thereof. There are SEVENTEEN people aboard the "Prometheus" and that is just way too many for a film that barely runs over two hours. The original Alien had only seven characters for you to remember, and none of them were particularly close to cannon fodder. They were all fairly well developed, well written, and distinctive. I can't say the same for this cast. Outside of Michael Fassbender (the best character in the film in my humble opinion) and Noomi Rapace (whose character does grow a slight bit), everybody is a cardboard cutout of a character. Even the greats like Idris Elba and Charlize Theron (hottest African woman ever?) are borrowing queues from the Big Book of Cliches. Then again, I suppose I can't expect much from the writer of 2011's critically panned The Darkest Hour and the producer of the horrendously disappointing Cowboys & Aliens when they're put in charge of writing remotely interesting human beings. It won't necessarily bring down your overall enjoyment of the film, but it may keep it stuck as an "okay" to "good" film rather than a "great" one.

The editing in this film also had me upset. Prior to watching Scott's film tonight, I viewed James Cameron's Director's Cut of Aliens again. It's astonishing to see how you can improve an already outstanding film by adding in lost/cut footage, especially considering that it doesn't work all the time (I'm looking at you Donnie Darko). I would adore seeing a director's cut of this project, as I'm curious as to how much was left on the cutting room floor. Perhaps some proper character introductions and development? Or even more explanation about what our team discovers later while exploring caverns on the undisclosed (and unnamed) planet?

Whatever the case, I still enjoyed this film quite a bit. I'm not quite sure how the general audience reaction will turn out to be after this weekend, though I've already heard very mixed feelings from all sides. Some saying they think it might be "too smart" for it to truly do well, others saying that it is "The Phantom Menace" of the Alien franchise (to which I say, if you think this is worse than Alien Resurrection or either of the Vs. films, you should hesitate when it comes to breeding). Just be forewarned: it is NOT in the same vein as Alien, and you are setting yourself up for massive disappointment if you expect it to be. It's its own little unique sort of monster (pun possibly intended...aw crap, was that a spoiler?). Go see it for yourself and let me know what you think.

Piranha 3DD Review

Previously, at Lake Victoria, an incident occurred that left hundreds dead from an attack by prehistoric piranha. One year later, thanks to a couple of incompetent farmers, a freshly hatched school of the fish decide to make their way to a newly opened water park in Arizona, hungry for young, exposed, nubile flesh.


Though I completely understand and even somewhat agree with the criticisms of 2010's Piranha 3D, a very loose remake of Joe Dante's 1978 Jaws knockoff Piranha, I'll still confess to being a fan and having had an absolute blast watching it in theaters when it was released. When I first heard news of this film's existence, I was skeptical, especially knowing that more than likely, little to none of the original cast and crew would return (only partially true). Then, over time, more and more names were being attached to the project which instilled confidence in me that the project was going to be even better than it's predecessor. John Gulager (the Feast trilogy) was attached to direct, David Hasselhoff and Gary Busey signed on as co-stars, and it was being filmed in my own backyard! Well, okay, not LITERALLY my own backyard, but Wilmington, NC would be able to lay claim to having Piranha 3DD filmed over the course of several weeks to a month. Then the trailer surfaced, which excited me more than I thought was possible. It looked to be just as silly and over-the-top as Alexandre Aja's 2010 bloodbath was, if not even more so.

Alas, I always go back to one simple quote that film critic Martin Thomas/Leon from the oh so awesome spill.com said several years ago: "Trailers Lie."

This is a colossally disappointing sequel that promises much more than it actually delivers. I could spend hours picking this apart, but I'll try and contain it within a few paragraphs. The first real problem comes from the initial title of the film, which promises (perhaps exactly) twice the amount of blood, boobs, and general badassery from the first.

Yeah...that isn't the case.

Most of the blood and gore feels significantly tamer than the previous film, which is especially shocking considering Gulager's previous work. A small part of me suspects that there may have been some meddling around during production which would prevent this film from being as horrific as it could have been. It is entirely possible that the blame falls on Gulager himself though, who I'm starting to view as a one trick pony, considering this is the third time in a row that he's released something considered a "disappointment" by fans and critics alike. As far as the second "b," yes there is an ample amount of flesh exposed (from both genders) but they are mostly quick flashes, so anybody looking to add this to the "spank bank" history books may be more irritated than aroused. For the third "b," thankfully there ARE some relatively cool scenes involving Ving Rhames (who is uncredited) and David Hasselhoff (one of the two things worth remembering in this film, the other being a line uttered by 30 Rock actress Katrina Bowden), but it doesn't make the film worth spending $7-10 on if you ask me.

Speaking of the cast, most of them range from looking bored (David Koechner), to being barely in it whatsoever (Gary Busey, Clu Gulager), to acting and looking like confused llamas (Meagan Tandy). I know I shouldn't expect oscar-caliber acting from something of this nature, but jesus, at least TRY to look like you're having fun. You were essentially filming most of this in a water park and were surrounded by a plethora of attractive naked people, not to mention that Wilmington IS the 10th drunkest city in the nation, so surely you could find inspiration somewhere else in case of boredom. Oops, almost went on a rant there.

Finally, while I watched this in 2D (don't have the capability of viewing 3D films from Time Warner Cable), it seemed like the 3D was more half-assed than the previous film as well. I doubt my opinion of the finished product would have been altered much with a 3D screening though.


I just can't strongly recommend this. If it comes on cable within the next few months (more than likely), or appears on Netflix soon (also more than likely), you may get some cheap laughs here and there, but otherwise, stay away.