X-Men: Days of Future Past review

Summer. The time for movies with big explosions, big stars, and bigger budgets. Often, these movies are shameless CGI fests with barely a plot (I'm looking at you The Amazing Spider-Man 2). Once in a while, a film will come around that not only satisfies our hunger for things blowing up, but also is a good movie in general. The newest X-Men film does that. X-Men: Days of Future Past is the newest installment in the canon of X-Men films. It's set in a dreary post-apocalyptic future where mutants are being hunted by giant super-robots called Sentinels. The plot involves one of the mutants, Kitty Pryde (Ellen Page), sending Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) back in time to the early 1970's to stop Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) from killing Bolivar Trask (Peter Dinklage). Trask is the scientist who invents the Sentinels and killing him would only kick start the mutant hunting program and ensure the mutants a dark and painful future. Plus, there's a bunch of other stuff that happens involving more time travel and mutant stuff that I don't need to mention here. I know, that sounds incredibly convoluted. Movies about time travel often fall victim to being convoluted, even more so when you throw in a bunch of superheros and government plots. Yet, somehow X-Men: Days of Future Past doesn't feel convoluted and overtly confusing at all. It glides along at a pace rarely seen in a Bryan Singer movie, and doesn't stumble at the parts when things get tricky. It's probably Singer's most confidently directed film since The Usual Suspects. Best of all? It's fun. Like, really fun. Most of the past X-Men flicks have been too serious for their own good. The X-Men comics are very funny and tongue and cheek. A dark, serious tone doesn't work all that well for it. That's why the last film, X-Men: First Class was so great. Sure, it kept a straight face during the intense battle sequences and moments of extreme duress, but it never forgot to relax and smile a bit either. Bryan Singer never seemed to be able to fully grasp that concept in his X-Men movies. Not to say they were all bad. X-Men 2 was decent and fun, but it still had many issues. It seems Singer has learned a thing or two since then. X-Men: Days of Future Past is probably the best X-Men film since First Class. I sincerely mean that. It balances tension and comedy marvelously. The actors here are all at their best. Michael Fassbender, who's mostly a dramatic actor, plays his character with an expertise rarely seen in superhero films. James McAvoy is doing the same. My only complaint on the acting spectrum is Nicholas Hoult. He didn't do a bad job, but he really didn't stand out either. Hoult just kind of looks surprised and gasps when needed. The script didn't give him a whole lot to do, so it's not entirely his fault, but he could have tried a little harder. The screenplay itself dealt with the plot and characters very, very well. I've seen time travel movies butcher themselves from problems with that. This movie dances around it's time travel anomalies quite well. Despite all those great things, the dialogue here wasn't very good at all. It wasn't actively atrocious, but it came out very cliche and flat. Some memorable lines include "No!" and "Why did you abandon us!". I couldn't help but chuckle a bit at parts. Other than that I thought the movie was incredibly solid and super (pun very much intended) entertaining. I really liked how they set this film in the 70's. It worked really well with the characters and material. As I said above, the fun and light vibe is so much better for the X-Men films than the dark and brooding. That's why the last two films have been, in my opinion, the best of the series. Superhero movies are meant  to be enjoyable popcorn entertainment. Yet, they also need a heart and some actual plot that's at least somewhat original. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 couldn't do any of that, and that's why it was bad. X-Men: Days of Future Past was able to pretty much completely achieve equal levels of entertainment and emotional and thematic weight. I'll admit it. I kind of loved this movie. It was good. The ending (which I won't spoil) did irk me a little, but I can let it slide in favor of the rest of the movie. This isn't the best movie of the year, but it certainly isn't the worst. And it probably will end up being the best superhero film of the year. If you want to have some fun at the theater, this is the movie to see. I give X-Men; Days of Future Past 4 out of 5 stars. Happy Viewing. Also, if you haven't done so already: you can follow me on Twitter @WhitsMovies and like me on Facebook at Facebook.com/WhitsMovies. 

The Counselor review

Cormac McCarthy is one messed-up dude. Seriously.
I first saw the trailer for The Counselor at screening a few months ago. It seemed like the perfect film. A seemingly exciting thriller about drugs, girls, guns, and intrigue. With a terrific cast of such greats as Brad Pitt, Micheal Fassbender, and Javier Bardem. Written by Cormac McCarthy! Writer of No Country for Old Men (the book)! And best of all, directed by Ridley Scott. THE Ridley Scott. Director of Blade Runner and Gladiator. I honestly thought this was going to be one of the better films of the year. Then, when I saw some of the early reviews for The Counselor coming out. I was kind of bummed. The reviews were increasingly negative. With all the talent involved, how could this possibly be bad? Well for one, I don't think it is really bad. It's not overwhelmingly good, but it has some nice things about it and I think it's been generally misunderstood. First off, the plot. A successful lawyer known only as The Counselor (Micheal Fassbender), seems to have it all. An attractive wife, Laura (Penelope Cruz). Money. Nice cars. But things start to go south for him when he gets involved with a drug deal that goes very, very bad. So, I went in to The Counselor with generally low expectations because of what I'd seen in reviews. Yet, my love for Ridley Scott and Cormac McCarthy brought me to the theater to see the film. I was scared that the movie would be a black hole in movie history. An abundance of talent that collapsed under its own weight. Luckily for me, there was a light at the end of the tunnel. Maybe it was because I thought it was going to be so bad, but I kind of liked The Counselor. The reason I believe it seems to be almost universally hated is because everyone had such high expectations for it. Sure, Ridley Scott could have done better, but he's not always great. I think this was better than Black Hawk Down. Cormac McCarthy I think did a damn good job with the screenplay. I know a lot of people think differently, but it wasn't bad. His dialogue is very symbolic and poetic. It seems strange coming out of actual people. I think it would be better suited to a novel, but it kind of works here. The reason is because the world that Cormac created isn't a normal world. People talk differently. People act differently. Rules that apply in our world don't apply in his world. The world of The Counselor is this gritty and strange reality where everyone has a secret and no one can be trusted. It's truly pretty interested. Then again, I'm not saying The Counselor is so great. But I am saying it's very underrated. What I think people were expecting is a fast-paced bulletfest comparable to a more violent James Bond flick. What they got was a much more slower paced and dialogue driven thriller. I liked The Counselor more than I expected to. The performances were decent. Micheal Fassbender is constantly proving himself to be a capable and great actor. He just came off a great role in 12 Years a Slave, and now he was damn good in this. The rest of the cast is just alright. Good, but nothing special. Cameron Diaz plays this evil woman who seems to control everything. She's certainly trying, but I don't think she was all that good to begin with. Yet, Fassbender's performance is enough. Ridley Scott's direction is kind of weirdly slow and focuses more on the characters than usual. It's not his best job but it's more than just alright. The best part of the movie are the interesting neo-noir story that Cormac can do so well. Overall I was impressed compared to all the negative buzz that surrounded it. Some reviewers called it "a boring mess" and "an empty, nasty piece of work". I don't think it's deserving of all the hate. It could be better, but I was pleasantly surprised. I think it's safe to say I liked The Counselor. I didn't love it, but I did like it. This just goes to show you can't always listen to the critics. For example, last year's Lincoln got bombarded with praise and award nominations. Yet, I found it to be an incredibly boring film that boarded on painfully slow. Most critics seemed to hate this movie and yet I found it to be fairly well done. It's not for everyone, but I'd say it's worth a watch. I give The Counselor 3.4 out of 5 stars. Happy Viewing. You can follow me on Twitter @WhitsMovies and like me on Facebook at Facebook.com/WhitsMovies.        

12 Years a Slave review

This film is directed by Steve McQueen. The art house director, not "The King of Cool". Just wanted to clear that up.

I've heard a lot of people call 12 Years a Slave 'the best movie they never want to see again'. I couldn't disagree more. While 12 Years a Slave is a damn good film, I would love to see it again. Many people are saying how gruesome and visceral it is. It was hard to watch at parts, sure. Yet, I feel like multiple viewings would be helpful in getting a truly full experience from the movie. All the terrific performances and techniques the movie has are just too good not to see again. Some movies, like Lincoln for example, were very well done, yet so incredibly boring that I wouldn't want to sit through it again. 12 Years a Slave isn't boring. I know the reason people wouldn't want to see it again is because of how sad and violent it is. Even so, I'd still want to recreate the incredible experience it was to see this film again. The movie is really gritty and bloody. but that's how it should be. A movie about the horror's of slavery shouldn't be sugar coated and censored. Therefore the sheer bloodiness of the film is unfortunately necessary. I hope the academy doesn't snub McQueen with a Best Director nod like they did with Kathryn Bigelow and Quentin Tarantino last year for the subject matter of their movies. 12 Years a Slave is well acted, directed, and shows an unbelievable true story for what it is: a tale of survival and horror. It's not Hollywood-ized or made into some heroic adventure tale. Yeah, it's heartbreaking and sometimes very painful to watch, but it works. I think it's safe to say 12 Years a Slave is one of the better films of the year. Solomon Northup (Chiwetel Ejiofor) is a well-to-do free black man with a nice family living in Saratoga, New York. One day, he is kidnapped and sold into slavery. His past life is stripped away and everything that once mattered to him is seemingly forgotten. Even his name is changed. He is first a slave under the kind Master Ford (Benedict Cumberbatch). Unfortunately, Ford's second in charge, named Tibeats (Paul Dano), is quite cruel and hates Solomon right away. A series of brutal events leads Solomon to serve under the crueler and angrier Master Edwin Epps (Micheal Fassbender). There, he is worked hard and beaten. Northup's will is put to the test. At Epps' plantation is where he spends most of his time in the film. Solomon's fantastic skill of playing the violin is of some help, but he is still targeted by Epps and his wife. Some of the most depressing and harsh moments take place in this point of the movie. As harsh as they were, they were necessary in making the movie as realistic and gritty as it is. I can't stress that enough. As I said before, the performances are terrific. The best being form Chiwetel Ejiofor and Micheal Fassbender. I feel like Benedict Cumberbatch and Brad Pitt could have given some truly memorable portrayals here, but they are only given a very small amount of screen time. I have no doubt whatsoever that Ejiofor will get a Best Actor nomination and I hope Fassbender will get a Supporting nod. The acting, while good, isn't the only good part of the film. McQueen does a great directing job here. Regretfully, I haven't seen Shame or Hunger (yet!) but I already know he will go on to be one of the great directors of our time. 12 Years a Slave is filmed with a certain character-based realism that almost made me believe I was there. At the end there's a close up shot of Ejiofor's face with the background blurred out. The rack-focus close up technique ,especially used with Chiwetel Ejiofor, just shows how worn out and weary the once free man was. It's powerful stuff. I was expecting 12 Years a Slave to be a pretentious over-hyped bore. It wasn't any of that. As much as I loved Prisoners, I think '12 Years' tops it as Best Movie of the Year So Far. Believe the hype. 12 Years a Slave is damn good. I give 12 Years a Slave 5 out of 5 stars. You can follow me on Twitter @WhitsMovies and like me on Facebook at Facebook.com/WhitsMovies.