Dr. Seuss' The Lorax

If I were in a position to bring one of Dr. Seuss’ classic stories to the big screen, the utterly depressing story of The Lorax definitely wouldn’t be my first choice. But someone thought it would be a good idea. The animated take brings the story a step further than the book, giving back stories to some of the characters and introducing others to round out the one dimensional arch readers are used to. Zac Effron provides the voice of Ted, a boy from the completely artificial town of Thneedville. After learning that the girl he has a crush on (voiced by Taylor Swift) is interested in now extinct trees, he visits the mysterious Once-ler (Ed Helms) in order to learn where he can find one. But first the Once-ler tells his story and the failed attempt of the Lorax (Danny Devito) to save the trees.

This adaption does well to add some fun elements to the plot, which originally is more of a death march than a comedy. With more than half of the film focusing on the story of The Lorax, the non-speaking characters (fish, bears, birds) provide a good amount of comic relief. In addition, the Lorax and the Once-ler have both been redesigned as comic characters. Though I wonder how happy Dr. Seuss would be with the fact that his attack on corporate greed was dimmed down to appease the masses. But on the other hand, the story deals with generalized stereotypes of both conservative and liberal minded individuals. Real life situations aren’t as simple as what the film presents. Corporate entities aren’t always out to destroy the environment for the sake of a few dollars. In addition, environmentally concerned individuals don’t just sit around playing cards in the sunshine. We all fall somewhere in between.

As far as production goes, Dr. Seuss’ The Lorax is very high quality. While other Seuss stories have a complete lack of human characters, this one doesn’t. So there has to be a balance between realism and the species ambiguous creatures. But Illumination Entertainment does well. Really all technical aspects of the film are done well. It just comes down to the script. On a scene to scene basis the film is a lot of fun for its intended young demographic. It moves along very quickly and keeps the viewer’s attention. Let’s just leave out some of the political buzz words next time. Kids don’t care.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

The Hunger Games

The reason The Hunger Games has become such a huge phenomenon is because the concept is a relatively fresh one. Plus beneath the intriguing surface, there are countless themes and messages about society, gender and media. The film adaption is able to translate those themes into a reasonably timed feature. For the few of you who are unfamiliar, the story follows Katniss, played by Jennifer Lawrence, who lives in a future where each district that makes up the United States must offer a teenage boy and girl to participate in the Hunger Games, a televised fight to death.

With such a small margin of error casting a blockbuster like this, each main character fits their actor very well. Sure Lawrence and her fellow tribute Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) are playing younger parts, but that’s okay by me. Director Gary Ross does well addressing the violence in a suitable way for a PG-13 audience by employing frequent use of handheld camera techniques. I wouldn’t have expected it to work, but the shaky camera actually dilutes the brutality. This becomes clear when Cato (Alexander Ludwig) breaks a tribute’s neck during a more solid shot. It caused the most audible gasp from the audience during my screening. Apparently the savagery didn’t get to them when the camera wasn’t clear.

As almost an exact adaption from novel to film, there’s a good chance that most fans saw their favorite scene make the cut. But it must be said that a less literal adaptation would have restored some of the drama that is lost from already knowing the twists and turns. That isn’t to say the film isn’t exciting. The reaping, the lottery which decides the tributes, is brutally sad. And there is a great deal of tension through many events, which could easily come across as mundane.

The film is likely too long for non-fans, but there isn’t much time spent not advancing the story. A dialogue hiccup or two also interrupt what is, for the most part, a very well-acted movie. The Hunger Games is not as poor as the critical viewers have stated and it’s not as perfect as the ultimate fans have claimed. But it definitely falls significantly closer to the high end of that spectrum.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

Project X

Let’s pretend for one minute that high school is the most important time in everyone’s lives. Then let’s pretend that the cool kids in high school are all drug addicts and skanks. If these generalizations were true, then Project X is the coolest movie of all time. But it’s not. The film is a found footage account of a group of average, unpopular high school students who throw a massive birthday party in an attempt to be noticed. But the party gets more out of control with each passing scene.

There is such a level of discomfort when watching the film, I often found myself wondering if that is the desired emotion. Is the audience supposed to be shaking their head in amazement with how “awesome” the party is? I sure didn’t. The fact that the cast of mostly unknown actors maintain the façade is definitely a positive. The film seesaws between severe discomfort and more positive emotions like humor. But the jokes don’t actually ease the tension for more than a second. The viewer ends up hating characters you’re meant to like because of the damage they cause.

Found footage movies tend to stay below 90 minutes and still feel too long; Project X meets the first half of those criteria, but is paced well. There is a good amount of time spent before and after the party to establish and resolve the story. And plot development actually does occur in between montages of drinking games and sex. When the films ends and the maximum amount of damage is amassed, the characters seem fairly proud of themselves. But was it worth it? To these misguided teenagers, I guess so. But the audience can ask the same question, is this film worth the cost of production or the cost of admission? Unless you are really into high school parties, it probably isn’t.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

21 Jump Street

21 Jump Street has all the hype thanks to a strong marketing campaign, and somehow the movie actually lives up to it. The story fits in as a sequel to the original 80s TV series. The undercover program in the film is a revived version of the original. This time, Channing Tatum and Jonah Hill play misfit cops who are sent into a school attempting to uncover the truth behind a new drug that led to the death of a teenage student.

Surprisingly for a comedy like this, there are actually some insightful moments among the hysterical situations. Both characters develop as they learn the side of high school they never knew. Hill’s character, a geek in high school, experiences being part of the “cool crowd” and the positives and negatives that come with that. Tatum, originally popular, falls in with the “geeks” and sees the pettiness of high school politics. But don’t get too hung up on these lessons because the comedy is tremendously well written. From poking fun at themselves by insulting the act of recycling old ideas, to showing the odd truth that environmentalism is cool among high school students now, the film really works for its jokes. It passes on the easy, predictable laughs, and the approach works really well.

While Tatum and Hill deserve most of the credit for each giving one of their best performances, the supporting and bit players fill in the blanks well. Ice Cube, Dave Franco, Rob Riggle, Ellie Kemper, Nick Offerman, the list could keep going. But the fact that they rarely go more than a minute without a successful joke or funny moment means that 21 Jump Street is one of the best comedies in recent memory. The film is a perfect example of how to redefine a franchise. Just make the movie really good.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

John Carter

Long before the projected numbers came out on John Carter, it was pretty clear that the advertising was off base. They only seemed to show the coliseum scene in the previews, which looked quite similar to the one in Star Wars: Episode II. But actually, the film brings a level of mystery with its vast alien war while developing a huge amount of interesting characters. Taylor Kitsch plays the title character, a Confederate Civil War vet, who is transported to Mars. Once there he is pitted in the middle of a fight between nations and is taken in by four-armed natives.

The look of the non-human characters is just cheesy enough to give the film sci-fi credibility. Plus the fact that the Edgar Rice Burroughs’ book is the basis for so many modern works of sci-fi, a level of respect must be given to the moments that appear recycled. After all, this story came first. John Carter employs very well done CGI to produce a good percentage of the film and is very believable throughout. This is definitely one aspect of the film where the hefty price tag is worth it.

Kitsch carries the film well and none of the many other characters ever outperform him. I wish he would steer clear of Christian Bale syndrome though. By that I mean the unnaturally raspy voice Bale uses in the Batman films. Kitsch phases it in at the moments where he is attempting to act particularly tough. The rest of the cast give above average performances. Mark Strong is probably a step ahead of that. But overall there are fewer weaknesses than expected from such a big budget blockbuster. While long, there are enough themes and story-lines to thoroughly split the audience’s attention. It’s a shame shoddy advertising will end up costing John Carter a worthy box office push.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

A Thousand Words

Everyone is quick to jump on Eddie Murphy for starring in strange comedies that ultimately become failures. But honestly, he’s already starred in hugely successful films. Let him do what he wants. Now, I say this after watching A Thousand Words, which is by no means as bad as some of his other flops. A Thousand Words has Murphy playing a talkative literary agent who learns the importance of his words after a tree appears in his background with leaves that are directly linked to how much he speaks. When all the leaves fall off the tree, he will die. Yes, that’s a pretty dumb premise.

The general progression of the film is flawed for a number of reasons. The lead isn’t a particularly evil person to begin with. So this curse is a bit strange. Then when he discovers the situation, he refuses to use his words to explain anything to his wife or save his job. But he does get drunk one night and sing a lot, wasting most of his remaining leaves. When the convoluted story finally makes sense, in the film’s last act, there is this colossal shift from ridiculous humor to dense philosophical discussion. It’s strangely jarring. A number of people around me were even crying when things got serious.

It’s fine to have a message in a comedy, but the scenes where we learn Murphy’s character is physically linked to the tree are too stupid to keep any credibility. He has a tickling fit when squirrels chase each other up the trunk and he gets high when the gardener sprays pesticide on it. Just dumb. A Thousand Words is moderately funny and maybe slightly inspirational. Neither aspect is done well enough to call the film a success. Let’s see where Eddie goes from here.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

Act of Valor

Aren’t there security concerns with advertising the presence of active duty Navy Seals in your wide release movie? With the fact that this was the most heavily pushed aspect of the film, I guess not. Plus their full names are never exposed. Act of Valor stars those Navy Seals as taking part in a story based on real events. The goal was apparently to make the most realistic battle movie ever. Is it? I have no idea. You’ll have to ask the Seals. The plot follows a Seal team as they uncover a terrorist plot during a more routine rescue mission. Tracking events all over the globe, the team ultimately engages a group of suicide bombers on the verge of breaking into the US through a series of Mexican tunnels.

The fighting scenes come across as very calculated. There are rarely any moments of blind fighting that are common in big action movies. This is important to the story because of the discipline it shows on the part of the Seals. Even when an enemy is shooting every which way trying to hit a target, the protagonists wait for the clear shot. But since the focus is almost completely on the action elements, the dialogue scenes are wasted with incredibly weak acting and shots that would be well suited for a country music video. I of course have a huge amount of respect for these men and women, but a professional actor or two matched up with the team may have helped with the speaking parts.

If in fact Act of Valor is a realistic representation of Seal life, it does well to demystify the group quite a bit. The audience learns that the teams knows most of the details of the overall situations they are handling and are much more than feet on the ground. But there is also the sad truth that they elite soldiers aren’t unbeatable and some don’t make it home. The film plays out exactly as advertised. But the confusing first act and the fact that 90 percent of the acting is awful play strongly against it.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

Wanderlust

Has anyone seen Wanderlust? In a fairly calm time of year, somehow this Judd Apatow vehicle has come with little to no fanfare. Plus it’s starring Jennifer Aniston and Paul Rudd. So there are famous people in it. Maybe it was the full frontal male nudity alluded to in the trailer that kept people away. The film has Aniston and Rudd moving to Georgia after both have bad luck on the employment front in New York. Before arriving at his brother’s house in Atlanta they stop off for a night at a hotel. But the bed and breakfast turns out to be a commune full of hippies and such.

The basis for most of the comedy in the film is the fish out of water scenario the leads are placed in. Unfortunately, that doesn’t always deliver the laughs. Some of the characters are just angry hippies who contribute nothing more than being annoying. Some do better though. Justin Theroux plays the free love spouting “cool hippie” and Alan Alda is great as the burnt out founder, who keeps repeating the names of his old friends in any situation. But an actor with his résumé deserves a few more scenes than he gets.

Through one absolutely hilarious scene with Rudd in front of a mirror, the movie can be looked at as memorable. But for the most part it’s just pretty funny. It would be nice to see Rudd get away from the hippie scene after back to back projects. (Our Idiot Brother is the other.) Coincidentally they both have Kathryn Hahn in support as an angry hippie. So maybe it’s time for something else. But Wanderlust is definitely worth more than its lack of marketing campaign would suggest. Joe Lo Truglio’s nudity is quite jarring just so you know. He plays a nudist winemaker, how cultural.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance

You will never find me complaining about too many comic book movies being made. Of course some are better than others. I think most people would place Ghost Rider on the lower end of that spectrum. Yet, here we are with a sequel. Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance reunites Nicholas Cage with his flaming motorcycle as former daredevil Johnny Blaze. After making a deal with the devil to save his father, Blaze is cursed to change into the rider, flaming skull and all. But the origin story is just glossed over in this film since the viewer already saw that part in the original.

When announced, I didn’t know how I felt about Nicholas Cage coming back for the role, but he does really well actually. At first, he seems terrible, but then all of a sudden with a scene where he is trying to fight back the need to change into the rider, it become clear that he is actually giving a great performance. Nicholas Cage knows how to “act” crazy and showcases that here. The rest of the casting shows restraint on where to place the other big names. Instead of breaking the bank on a damsel in distress, the lesser known Violante Placido does well as the female lead, with a bit of an edge. Then Ciaran Hinds as Roarke (the devil) and Idris Elba as Moreau bring welcome credibility and quality. Also, congratulations to Elba on entering the multiple Marvel character club. (He is in Thor if you don’t remember.)

This sequel is definitely a comic book fan take on the character. The original was keen on keeping everything age appropriate. Spirit of Vengeance presents the edge that has always kept Ghost Rider a marginal character in the Marvel universe. He is a vigilante who has no problem with heavy violence. So that is celebrated with the film, which shows how brutal The Rider can be. How about when he spits flaming bullets in the face of an enemy like a machine gun? Imagine Iron Man or Spider-Man doing something like that. It wouldn’t happen. Even though Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance is a significant upgrade from the original, it is still a fringe film meant for a very specific demographic. But will it surprise you? “Hell yeah” (said in an imitation Nicholas Cage’s raspy voice.)

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.