Ice Age: Collision Course

Image Source

 Ice Age 5 had a lot going for it. The animation is really good. It’s fast-paced and colorful. A lot of the talent involved actually comes to play. This includes John Leguizamo, Ray Romano, Queen Latifah, Adam Devine, Denis Leary, Nick Offerman, Josh Peck, Seann William Scott, Wanda Sykes, Jennifer Lopez, and Simon Pegg. The story just doesn’t work, and a lot of the jokes feel forced. There were points where I got laughs out of John Leguizamo (who made me annoyed half of the time), Denis Leary, and Simon Pegg. The rest of the characters are either bland or just obnoxious. The worst, by far, is Manny (voiced by Ray Romano, who actually puts effort into his work). I remember actually liking Manny in the first couple movies. But, here, he’s unlikable and mean-spirited. Something I notice more and more as the movies go on is that Scrat and his acorn shenanigans have little to do with the rest of the movie, even if it does offer the occasional laugh here and there. Collision Course is the movie in the franchise that tells me Ice Age has officially jumped the shark. Scrat, still in search of his acorn, somehow ends up in space, and uses a spaceship. From here, he creates the planets, pulls the moon into Earth’s orbit, and actually sends the meteors towards Earth, thus setting into motion the titular collision course. The saddest thing is that while the movie does get more tolerable later on, those first 15 minutes had settled in, making me so mad that enjoying the rest of the movie just got really difficult. Despite good animation, a few likable characters, and the occasional good, funny writing, I can’t say that I thought that this movie was good. However, I do kind of recommend it because, even for this series, Ice Age 5 is just plain weird.      

4 / 10

Don't Breathe

 

Image Source

A trio of friends rob houses with the purpose of saving up enough money to leave their broken, crappy lives in inner-city Detroit. One of the houses they decide to rob is the house of a blind army vet. The vet proves to be a formidable opponent (and one of the best horror movie villains I’ve seen in a long time). One of the things I like about this movie is that director Fede Alvarez and Rodo Sayagues understand character development. In any other movie, I would probably hate the three main characters. However, the characters are fairly well-developed, especially Rocky (played by Jane Levy). I understand her dilemma, and actually want her to succeed. Now, do I feel the character development is as strong as, say, Lights Out? No, but I do feel that it’s there. The beginning of the movie is a little slow. I actually like this because it builds character. Once they enter the house, the shit hits the fan. I loved the use of music in the movie too. It almost always seems to have sense of putting the viewer in edge. Stephen Lang as the blind man gives a performance that simultaneously makes the blind man frightening and sympathetic, something essential to a good villain. The blind man’s house makes for a great contained setting. It looks like an actual, run-down house, and it feels lived in. There are moments in the movie where certain sounds drop out, and they are incredibly effective. I also want to praise some of the more disturbing scenes (namely one involving a turkey baster). Don’t Breathe works as a nerve-racking display of suspense and horror, making for what I believe to be the best horror movie of the year so far.

9 / 10             

Lights Out

 

Image Source

In Lights Out, a family finds themselves tormented by a spirit from beyond the grave. The only catch is, this spirit can only attack when the lights are out. The family consists of Sophie (played by Maria Bello), a woman who has a history of mental illness, Martin (newcomer Gabriel Bateman), whom the spirit seems to affecting rather strongly, and Rebecca (played by Teresa Palmer), the protagonist of the film and my personal favorite character. Her struggle to help her estranged family and piece the overall mystery of what’s happening together. This is a movie I actually was very interested in, ever since I saw the trailer. The premise was something that intrigued me. First of all, I really want to compliment first time director Dan F. Sandberg. This is a guy who shows he knows how to build tension, and use scares effectively. But, he and writer Eric Heisserer also show an understanding of something I feel a lot of horror filmmakers today (save for a select few) miss is the idea of building character development, and actually making you care for the people who are in the movie itself. The characters are all strong and feel like they serve a purpose to the overall story. The actors all come to play and are pretty damn good in the movie. Teresa Palmer and Maria Bello are really good in the movie, in particular. Palmer gives off a performance as a young woman who has flaws, but genuinely cares about her younger brother. Bello, meanwhile plays a character who actively seems to care for her children, despite clearly not being all there. Occasionally, the movie will break its own rules, but not often, and never to a point I would’ve called this a bad movie. The spirit, called Diana, is a very effective villain in the movie. She makes the most of those moments where she has power, and I like that sort of determination in an antagonist. I can’t really call Lights Out the scariest movie I’ve ever seen, but it certainly is creepy. There are genuine moments of suspense and dread that are built up by strong acting, writing, directing, and editing for a really damn good summer horror movie. 

9 / 10        

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971)

Image Source

With the recent passing of Gene Wilder, I wanted to talk about this movie, which is one from my childhood. Is this the most faithful adaptation? No. That said, this is still a great movie. As far as children's movies go, it's fairly dark once you get past the seemingly warm and bubbly surface. Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory works as something of a twisted morality tale. Before I go on, just to be safe, I would like to issue a potential spoiler warning. I want to briefly address the fan theory that surfaced on the internet, not something I normally do. The theory goes that Wonka himself is a serial killer. One of the things I feel adds to this theory (something that actually works in the movie's favor) is the fact that once these kids give in to their personal vices, they disappear and are never seen in the movie again. Wilder's performance in the movie (he really was the standout to me amidst a sea of really good, if not a little bit corny at times, acting) helps. He gives Wonka a sort of childlike innocence. There is, however, something else to this Wonka as well. Wilder in the movie comes off someone who always seems as though he may or may not be hiding something, possibly a little bit more sinister than he's showing. There's a lot of other great things to be seen in the movie as well. The production design might seem a little dated by today's standards, but it still still looks pretty damned good. As I said already, the other actors are really good too. Peter Ostrum as Charlie is really good, especially for a child actor in his first movie. The makeup on the Oompa Loompas looks great. They feel as though they are from another world. For the most part, the songs are incredible classics (even though the song Cheer Up, Charlie doesn't do much for me personally). The singing is fairly hit-and-miss for me. Gene Wilder's singing deserves just as much praise as the rest of his performance. Jack Albertson, the actor who portrayed Grandpa Joe did give a solid performance, but seemed to struggle with keeping in tune. Overall, despite some fairly minor flaws, I still love this movie, as more than a nostalgia trip.

9 / 10   

The Angry Birds Movie

Image Source

Red (voiced by Jason Sudeikis) has lived his entire life with an anger management issue. He’s the most hated bird on his bird-inhabited island, and an incident puts him squarely in anger management class. One day, a ship full of a bunch of pigs (led by an obviously evil, but still entertaining Bill Hader) arrive. Red is the only one who sees that something is wrong, and attempts to do something about it. Angry Birds is much better than it has any right to be. The voice cast is pretty solid. For example, Jason Sudeikis sells Red’s dry sarcastic tone. Sean Penn creates a memorable and funny character despite only speaking in growls (not a word of dialogue, and you’d never know it was him). On that note, the writing for the characters is strong. Nowhere do I find that more obvious than in the character of the Mighty Eagle (voiced by the great Peter Dinklage). He’s a character that I think works because of a mix of writing and performance. The animation is top notch. It’s CGI, but manages to create a style that still looks and feels like old school Looney Tunes and Tom and Jerry. It’s very fast-paced and energetic, which I don’t see too often anymore. The movie does manage to follow the game by showing the conflict between the birds and pigs. However, I do have to acknowledge that the story is fairly cliched as well. I don’t how often I’ve seen the story element of the obvious villain that fakes being nice, or the misunderstood hero, the list goes on. While I did think the movie was funny overall, there just weren’t as many points where I roared with laughter as I would have liked. Overall, I do recommend this movie as a solid one-and-done rental.

7 / 10  

Nerve

 

Image Source

Vee (played by Emma Roberts) is a high school senior who never takes risks. At her friend’s behest, she signs up for an online game called “Nerve”. The idea of the game is described as truth or dare, minus the truth. She meets a guy (Dave Franco), whom she ultimately teams up with. If this is a movie that sounds interesting to you, go in blind. Don’t watch the trailer because it gives a lot of the movie away. With the trailer warning out of the way, I have to admit that I actually really liked this movie. Emma Roberts and Dave Franco have solid chemistry and work off each other really well. Emma Roberts, in particular is good in the movie. She gives a likable and relatable protagonist that I was actually rooting for. The biggest surprise to me was the performance by rapper Machine Gun Kelly, who was actually really entertaining (and clearly channelling his inner Matthew Lillard). Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman give the movie a distinct, slick look with their direction, which could only work for this movie. Some of the shots that I felt worked the best were the first-person shots helping add a layer of tension to the movie. There are some legitimately well-crafted moments of tension throughout. This movie does require a lot of suspension of disbelief, and that actually works in Nerve’s favor, the occasional plot hole be damned. I don’t think this is a movie that will age terribly well. I say this because this movie is very much of its time. It’s a perfect time capsule for this generation. Despite having a couple of issues with the leaps in logic and movie’s not likely holding up in the next few years, I thought Nerve was a decently fun matinee movie.

7 / 10        

Horror of Dracula (1958)

 

Image Source

Horror of Dracula is that type of horror movie that they just don’t make anymore. This is one of the films that helped put Hammer Studios on the map, and from the very beginning, it isn’t hard to see why. They had been making movies since the 1930s However, most of their films from the late 1950s onwards are what people tend to remember the most. The production design of the count’s castle is gorgeous. It has a sort of style that could only work for this movie. Christopher Lee as Dracula manages to make a performance that feels very close to the Dracula of the original source material, while still making a unique stamp on the character that is very much his own. Meanwhile Peter Cushing portrays Abraham Van Helsing with some badass swagger and charisma. The music is big and bombastic, fitting of a horror film from the 1950s. On the note of the music, it, along with the direction and Christopher Lee’s fantastic performance make him look damned intimidating when he needs to. What’s interesting is that Lee himself is to this movie what Anthony Hopkins was to Silence of the Lambs. He’s not in the film very much, despite being the most memorable aspect. I will say that this movie is a very loose adaptation of the original novel. It does follow a lot of the original book’s story elements, but changes a lot of things here and there. Some examples include Johnathon Harker’s profession, his reason for being there, and his ultimate fate. Some things haven’t aged particularly well. For example, during many of the outdoors shots, it’s obvious that the filmmaking is taking place in a studio. The film’s being in color doesn’t help because the sky clearly looks painted. For the most part, however, I felt that the movie’s visual style was incredibly striking and unique. Something I noticed as the film progressed was that almost every character was interesting, even the ones that barely have a minute of screen time, which I don’t see happen very often. Overall, this movie never really scared me, and it takes a lot of liberties with a source material I greatly admire. However, it is still a fantastic film that’s worth watching, especially for a bygone era. 

9 / 10