X-Men: Days of Future Past Review - You Had Me At Mutants and Time-Travel

I watched Days of Future Past earlier this week and after that, and after a few conversations with @dlf219, I went back and watched all the movies in the franchise again. These are my thoughts on X-Men: Days of Future Past and the franchise as a whole (including spoilers).

I loved the movie. I thought it was great. I thought the acting was superb. The story was well-written (which is something we usually forego when it comes to superhero blockbusters). But this was the first movie since The Dark Knight in 2008 that drew me in and enveloped me with its plots and character conflicts. I felt for Charles Xavier, just as much as I felt for and resonated with Magneto. The X-Men franchise as a whole has always dealt with how minorities are treated and the injustices they are subjected to. I preferred this current installment to Mystique in X-Men: First Class saying this: 

That aside, I'm glad to see that James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender and Jennifer Lawrence reprise their roles Professor X, Magneto and  Mystique. It's really the first time since Heath Ledger in 2008, that we've gotten to witness professionals flex their acting guns in a superhero movie, especially from Fassbender and McAvoy. 

The audience is immediately thrown into the fray at the start of the movie, which is pretty important. Which marks this as one of the first superhero blockbusters (that I can remember) that looks past the origin story or tries to introduce and familiarize its audience with what they should know or not. These guys jumped right into it. By doing so we had a movie that didn't dedicate thirty minutes to an hour, discovering powers, explaining back stories and really without any of the fluff that you would usually find in an origin movie. This allowed the writers to plunge right into the story, which I loved as a comic book geek. I did the time reading all those issues and watched all those animated TV shows as a kid. LET ME REAP MY REWARDS!

Sidenote: That's one of the reasons why geeks and critics alike prefer a majority of the animated movies (especially those produced by DC Comics and Warner Bros). A story is taken from the pages and put on the screen; end production. Not to be ungrateful, but no I don't need the first hour of the movie to explain to me why Joker does what he does. I understand why it's done, but whatever. Random tangent anyway. Back to X-Men.

More action scenes, or more plot. I prefer the latter, which is really what makes this a movie I can watch again and again.

I loved the introduction of newer, less popular mutants; Sunspot, Blink, Shadowcat, Bishop and Colossus make an appearance in a battle against the new and improved Sentinels. Quicksilver makes his big screen debut for the mutant movie franchise and it was AWESOME! If you haven't watched the movie yet, I'm sure you've heard about his 2-3 minute scene. Witty, playful, oddly calm... Evan Peters does a good job portraying his character. It's the best action scene I've seen in a superhero movie since Nightcrawler's assassination attempt on the U.S. President in X-2. This scene was damn near perfect. Jim Croce's "Time in a Bottle" was the perfect song and allowed us to witness one of the best bullet-time scenes I've seen since The Matrix.

Looking back, I kinda feel bad. I was disgusted when the movie posters were originally released and I saw the costume design etc. My apologies. Good job Bryan Singer and co.

Sidenote 2: I don't get why his character wasn't utilized more in the movie. He was obviously a big help earlier. You'd think Wolverine would recruit to help save the world. You could argue that it was because he's a kid but...

I digress. I loved the movie. Even though it's essentially a reset button that allows us to forget everything they did in the first two movies (yes I wiped Last Stand completely from memory). This is good for screenwriting purposes cause they can erase all the plot holes and inconsistencies from those and start on a clean slate. This is great for the studio franchise, cause guess what? It's all about money. Sony has Spider-man, Warner Bros has DC Comics and Disney/Marvel have the Avengers. It's an arms race guys, and Disney/Marvel is in the lead. Everyone else is playing catch-up. This is the healthiest reboot I've seen by far which means we don't have to suffer through any more origin stories (hopefully) and I cannot wait for the next movie in the franchise. The post-credits scene showed a young Apocalypse. Fox can't afford to mess this up. You literally cannot mess up an Apocalypse story in 2014. I won't stand for it! A great movie will give Fox the push they need to gain ground on the Avengers franchise.

The only thing I have left to add is this. As much as I love Ian McKellen and Patrick Stewart and their on-set chemistry and real-life bromance, I think it's time the reins of those two characters are passed on to Fassbender and McAvoy. I don't know how that would happen without creating more inconsistencies but whatever. I enjoy their dynamic as friends turned enemies and the franchise just needs an a change. A breath of fresh air if you will, and I think those two can give it what it needs.

All in all. Great movie. B+. The franchise gets an A for near-seamless restructuring and execution. Well done. 

Like a Good Neighbor: Neighbors Review

NO SPOILERS BTW!!!

Weed. Bro humor. Slapstick. The three essentials to a Seth Rogen movie. Let’s face it, it would not be a Seth Rogen movie without it; despite This is The End being a summer smash hit, we’re still loathing in apprehension about the aftermath of the Green Hornet. (I heard Seth Rogen single handed-ly deleted every meme from the internet, BUT WHAT ABOUT THOSE GIF'S THOUGH?!?!)

Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg have a keen knack for writing a stellar comedy; Rogen’s strength lies in his pen (insert Pen is Mightier than the Sword reference, or typical Seth Rogen joke and re-read after “insert” and delete the space between Pen and is) and his natural Will-Ferrell-esque ability to command onscreen attention without saying a line. However by me saying that, it was not Seth Rogen who took the final shot in the fourth quarter. 

That’s right; Seth Rogen was methodically outdone by his supporting cast. For starters Rose Byrne (more recently known for Insidious), playing Rogen’s wife in Neighbors, went blow for blow (spare me the indecent, cheap sexual innuendo) with Rogen throughout the whole movie. As an actress, Rose Byrne is solid and generally plays her characters well (I am not reducing her into merely a character actress) and I’m sure she has done some fine stage work. 

In Neighbors, she almost effortlessly improvises well enough to suggest a career in cinema comedies. I say that ashamedly, because I honestly thought that she was miscast for this role; I felt as though Leslie Mann would have been a more comedic-familiar face, especially since she’s done work with Rogen in Knocked Up and Funny People (age may have been a factor but don’t tell her that, or it would've been somewhat reminiscent of a “This is 40” feel). Ultimately, my bad Miss Byrne you did a fantastic job and surprised the jakes out of me. 

Next up is Lil Franco; yeah Dave Franco, the outrageous yet talented James Franco's younger brother, does his best mellow Dave Franco impression (laid back, yet introverted-ly spastic, with a intrepid delivery that has the potential to turn any punch line into a knockout) as he adds his bro-medic flair to the party. Franco is "lights out" as a wing-man, as he serves as a change of pace character to his counterpart. 

Another fresh face is Jerrod Carmichael who is the oddball in the whole equation but in a good way; he’s passively naive and has the comedic delivery of a seasoned Dave Chappelle apostle (since all black people look alike, he kind of looks like him too). 

To round out my starting five, I introduce, in my opinion, the star of the show; the elusive assassin two-guard; the headliner at Lollapalooza; Zachary “High School Musical” Efron. Zac Efron, in my opinion, was the main event of this production, channeling his inner 21 Jump Street Channing Tatum, Pain & Gain Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, jock with a soft side to deliver possibly the best comedic performance of his young, and hopefully bright comedic career PUSH IT PUSH IT, TO THE LIMIT LIMIT!!! 

Technical foul

Now, I may have pushed pass my limit in saying that Seth Rogen got upstaged left; I mean, he kind of wrote the screenplay for the movie.  So, technically, he’s writing jokes and punch lines for his supporting cast; he’s throwing dimes; he’s located in a remote location somewhere in the world representing OnStar; he’s like a good neighbor (nice Segway). 

Watching Seth Rogen pitter patter throughout his transcendent, simplistic, genuine, comedic screenplay without contributing a hefty amount of onscreen yuck’s to my yuck tank was like watching Boston Batman being pallid and unremarkable in BOTH The Town and Argo; two astonishing movies, that are directed and written in such a manner that would make John Huston proud. 

Hold your horses, I say transcendent because (well I love the word, duh) this movie is introduced as a suburban battle between neighbors; the movie transforms into a generational struggle, with the two parties compromising their established values to progress. The movie further dives into a bilateral expose by highlighting the inner conflict within the two factions; eventually, the film rounds out to a complete comedy, with a 4^th of July-like ending.  

With that said, Seth Rogen surfaces as the Wizard of Oz (paying homage to his buddy James Franco) by being the mastermind behind the curtain, and helms the pen with wit and ingenuity to maneuver a vehicle effectively, and by effectively I mean box-office bullying and critical acclaiming (for the second summer in a row, after an interesting five year comedic flop/acting chop development journey), while at the same time not being all what he’s exactly cracked up to as an Yucknited States Postal Service deliveryman, like his supporting cast undoubtedly were. 

Ultimately, if you haven’t seen it by now, definitely go see it this weekend if you are looking for your monthly yuck’s, because this movie is a very balanced, well rounded comedy, drawing inspiration from comedy reaching from the 60’s physical comedy to the present “just-go-with-it-improv’ comedy (especially if you’re in the male age demographic of 18-35); plus, I'm 50/50 (ha, pun intended) on how good the other Seth's movie will be (although, Ted was a surprise hit, lol).

Outside of that demographic, I honestly feel that this movie has key movements that even an untrained ear could detect and enjoy; the dynamics within the neighbor factions is an interesting dynamic that has enough material and depth to support a standalone movie. 

The Efron/Franco universe felt “21 & Over/Superbad” (another Seth Rogen penning)-ish, and the banter between Rogen and Byrne felt as though they shot another spin-off to Knocked Up (it was very “This is 40”-ish). By no means am I saying that the movie would have been enhanced by splitting them up, Mr. Starks; I am saying it would be interesting to see them focus solely on these story lines.

Sooooo, like I said earlier I’d go see it this weekend if you want to be entertained and enjoy yourself via penis humor (cockloads of them) and slapdick, excuse me, slapstick humor; and if you are skeptical about Seth MacFarlane's second outing, and need an Old School'd laugh; (MacFarlane plays heavily on shock-value humor and references (which is something that I enjoy; however, you may not enjoy this) so it's not say don't go see his movie).

Out in theaters..TODAY, you should g(WHAT A MINUTE!!! #familyguyjoke)

For a summer comedy, I would give it an A+, but for a movie I'd give it a C+ because it doesn't develop characters well (for example, Fogel (yes, I said Fogel) was underutilized) and it kind of just dwindled away pallidly at the end; this averages it out to a B+ overall. B+ for the 'burbs ain't bad for a bro-comedy; hopefully sorority girls don't move in next door **wacka wacka** sequel anyone?!?!

Ma[g]le[ni]ficent: Maleficent Review

NO MAJOR PLOT SPOILERS BTW!!!!!

If you were to tell me that Disney could give wings to aroute story centered around a historically crucial villainess and ultimately magic her into a fable-like, partially tragic heroine, I'd call bullshit quicker than Tinkerbell getting aroused at the sight of Peter Pan. Well, when you have a lead with such a high aptitude for acting, almost anything is possible...if you suspend disbelief a little and believe in magic. 

Angelina Jolie, making her return to the silver screen after a four year hiatus (not counting voice acting), elevates the standard for not only a villainess, but a heroine in an live-action fairy-tale movie. Disney turned this villainess into a motherly character troubled with the strife of her past and the consequences of emotionally rash decisions made in her younger, vindictive form. Maleficent is a healthy blend of a tragic heroine mixed with dark lady mixed with a Byronic heroine. 

The heroic villainess Maleficent experiences a roller-coaster of emotional progressions throughout the movie: joy, love, grief, despair, forgiveness, betrayal, anger, jealousy, pride, resentment, compassion, sacrificial burden, pain, forgiveness, apathy, and joy. Yes, one character went through the wire and returned, redefining the hero cycle. 

There were crucial moments where the character could have either chosen the hard route or taken a lifeline. Early on in the movie, Maleficent frets to make the tough decision in order to preserve the innocence of Aurora, which is something that parents may experience with their children at the dawn of major life stages, like in the movie. 

With a cynical outlook on life and love, Maleficent is softened by the purity of Aurora; the character development of Maleficent is harped on in this movie, as opposed to the character development hinted at in most Disney fairy-tale movies (although Beauty & the Beast did a good job with this).

Maleficent, the movie, does a great job keeping the viewer involved and emotionally invested, making you understand both sides; the movie undoubtedly casts shade on the human condition of greed and lust for power, also showing the stark contrast and antithesis of obsession and irrational paranoia of protection. 

King Stefan, the true villain played by Sharlto Copley, like all fairy-tale and narrative villains caused his own demise, although he was not caught monologue-ing; Copley transforms the archetypal king into a tragic anti-hero. 

King Stefan represents any underdog with a desire to be respected, putting him into a similar category as Tony Montana; he does what he must to ascend through the ranks. Yet, like Al Pacino in another Brian De Palma movie, he doesn't vanquish his threat like he's supposed to...major tragic flaw. 

[Sidebar, Maleficent's winged flight in this movie (probably expensive) showed Fox and Warner Brothers what they could do with Archangel and Hawkgirl/man, respectively.] 

Aurora, played by Elle Fanning, represents the ingenue in the movie and serves as a balance between the two troubled characters: one led by fear and guilt to protect her, and the other, jaded, led by resentment and jealousy to hurt anyone who cares about her (boomeranging to hurt the three characters in the process). 

Aurora also represents hope, as King Stefan has hope that concealing her and sheltering her from the world and its ills will prevent her from experiencing despair; this is an action that I've observed fathers partake in with their daughters; this unfortunately can do more harm than good, and is a selfish act, led by personal, not altruistic reasons; this quest for hope leads the king into a Dark, Forbidden forest, pun intended.

Aurora represents hope for Maleficent in a more positive way; Aurora personifies the good nature of humans and leads Maleficent down a righteous path in an effort to right her wrongs, sacrificing her well-being and knowingly walking up Mount Calvary. 

Stretching for similarities, one could say that Aurora bearing the curse of Maleficent represents a sacrificial lamb bearing the flaws of humanity (and in the movie, her father's and Maleficent's); humans must act in good faith to avoid them; Aurora, representing the positive side of human nature, must experience true love's kiss to arise from her death. I am no theologian, so I digress.

Right to left: Aurora, Maleficent, Stefan

Overall, the three main characters (Jolie, Copley, Fanning) with the comedic help of three fairies (Knotgrass, Thistlewit, and Flittle; played by Imelda Staunton, Juno Temple, and Lesley Manville, respectively) and the ravenous crow Diaval (played by Sam Riley) acted extremely well (especially Jolie, who puts on a clinic), transcending this seemingly, and skeptically directionless live-action re-imagining of 1959's animated Sleeping Beauty; oh yeah, the Ent creature Groot makes an appearance, lol.

Technically, the movie was well paced with a substantial amount of material and depth crammed into its 97 minute start to finish run time. The plot was stretched thin, which is expected of Disney, but with the complexity and character development of Maleficent, the thin plot was welcomed as it would have been tedious with more plot points. The beat changes were enough to carry the movie, as well as the unconventional route to "happily ever-after".

I would classify this as an alternative fairy-tale because the script was flipped sideways, serving as a pioneer (in this decade for Hollywood) for more live-action fairy-tale stories (see Cinderelly). The last time I remember this occurring was back in '91 with Hook, yet the captain ended up with the same villainous handicaps as the original animated adaption; no, Enchanted does not count. This universe, created by the writing, gives Disney options for spin-offs.

Visually, the movie was a sight for sore eyes, as the action sequences and the magic were carried out without being completely soaked in CGI juice. Robert Stromberg did a good job directing the movie, as the story was carried out in an effectively efficient manner.

From a cinematic standpoint, it accomplished its objectives by shedding light on and inducing compassion for an established villainess, morphing her into a heroic figure; therefore, I would give it an A, as it was also a magnificent, and refreshing cinematic experience (can't go wrong with a Lana Del Rey closing credit song).

Hitting me in soft spots with light drama, entertaining me comic relief, awing me with stunning acting, intriguing me with surprisingly interesting characters, and leaving me with no choice but to feel good, while dazzling me with visuals and a "hell-yeah" moment or two, and impressing me with a nice battle sequence, magic, and fire (yes, I said fire), Disney does a great job making this a summer blockbuster **crosses fingers for Star Wars** that deserves to be seen opening weekend.