Retro and the Girl

One day, I came home from a very long day at work wanting nothing more than to just spend a relaxing night at home with my wife.  Unfortunately, she was working that night and I knew that I was returning to an empty home.  However, before she left for work, my amazing wife had strategically arranged a couple of my action figures (nothing dirty...just amusing).  This inspired the creation of the resulting video, Retro and the Girl.

Thank you to Adam Collins of Lost Well Productions for help in creating the video.

But, most importantly, thank you to my amazing wife for having a playful spirit and a loving heart!



- The Gargyle

Movie review: The Other Guys

The Other Guys (2010)

Netflix streaming

Rating: 2.5/5

I wasn't all that impressed with this movie. I had heard that it was pretty funny, and it's from the same director (Adam McKay) of movies such as Anchorman and Talladega Nights, so I was expecting it to be pretty humorous. But there were only a few scenes that I found myself briefly laughing. It was pretty disappointing. Most of what McKay does is usually hilarious. Mostly because he has found a formula for his comedies that he has been able to make work. Of course, the downside of that is that most of his movies have started to all feel the same. That might be due in large part to the fact that Will Ferrell usually plays the lead role...and that role is usually practically the same character. The first few movies that Ferrell played such a character, it was hilarious. But the more that he plays that role, the more it starts to just feel annoying and like it's the same thing I've seen time and time again. In The Other Guys, Will Ferrell's character did start out as somewhat more of the straight man...but there was enough of a presence of his "zany" character to begin with that it never really felt right. Then, as the movie went on and he got zanier and zanier, it just felt like "ugh...not this again." I did think, however, that Mark Wahlberg did a great job. He is a much funnier actor than what some people might give him credit for.

As you could probably guess from my review so far, my recommendation is: pass. It wasn't entirely unpleasant to watch, but I wouldn't have been missing out on anything if I had never seen it. If you are wanting to see a McKay/Ferrell movie, I say just stick to either Anchorman or Talladega Nights.  Even if you've already seen them, I think you'd have a better time re-watching them than you would watching The Other Guys. If you are wanting a movie where Ferrell isn't playing that same type of character, I'd say go with Stranger Than Fiction. And if you are wanting Wahlberg in a comedic role, go for I Heart Huckabees.


This is a re-post of a brief review I did on my other blog, before starting Gargyle Reviews.  I have made a few grammatical changes, but the content of the review has not changed.  There are two other reviews (Thor and Inception) from my other blog that I will eventually be posting here.  I enjoyed both of those movies, and I do recommend watching them.  Before re-posting the reviews, however, I am going to watch the extras on the DVD/Blu-Rays and include that into my reviews.  Will my recommendation stay with just a "rent," or will either of them be upgraded to a "buy"??  Be sure to check back here to find out.

Be sure to follow me here and check back soon for more reviews and recommendations.  In the meantime, comment on this (or any other) review, and follow me on twitter @GargyleReviews

-GR

Movie review: X-Men Origins: Wolverine

X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)
Netflix blu-ray
Rating:  2/5

Following the success of the X-Men trilogy (well, at least the success of the first two films), X-Men Origins: Wolverine gives a more in-depth look at the life of Logan and how he became the Wolverine.  I saw this movie several months ago (at this point, probably over a year ago), so this review is going to be a bit shorter (and probably more "bullet-point" style) as it is based primarily off of the notes I made for myself at the time, and not a more recent experience.  I would go back and re-watch it to be able to give a more recent review, but honestly, I do not want to sit through this movie again.  I had heard nothing but negative reviews about this film, so I wasn't expecting much out of it.  But still, I loved the first two X-Men movies (by Bryan Singer...not the third one, by Brett Ratner), and Wolverine has always been one of my favorite comic book characters.  So, despite the negative reviews, I still really wanted to see it.  Even though Brett Ratner did what he could to destroy the X-Men franchise, I still held out hope that maybe the origin stories would help to bring the franchise back to something worth watching again.  I was foolish to hope for such things.  There were some things about Wolverine that I did enjoy, but overall it left me frustratingly underwhelmed.  By the way, there will be spoilers in this review.  So if you are thinking about seeing Wolverine, skip down to the end to read my recommendation first.  If you still want to see it, then come back to my review after you've watched it and leave some comments.  But if you don't plan on seeing it, then read on.

Wolverine started out disappointing from the very beginning.  It begins with Logan (Wolverine) and Victor (Sabretooth) as children who experience a traumatic event.  I know that it can be difficult to find good child actors, but the kids at the beginning of Wolverine are not believable as mutants...and are barely believable as kids.  Following the opening scene, there is a montage during the opening credits of Logan and Victor fighting in various battles throughout history.  I understand the use of this montage to quickly explain that Logan and Victor are both very old, and very difficult to kill.  But it doesn't really do much for the character development of either.  And it does absolutely nothing to show the reasoning for the transformation of Victor/Sabretooth from patriot to murderer, or explain why Logan/Wolverine and Victor/Sabretooth have turned out so differently after going through the same experiences.  And somewhere during that montage, Logan (who was called "James" during the opening sequence) goes from being named James to Logan...with no explanation for the change.

I like Liev Schrieber a lot, but I think that he is a little too clean-cut for Sabretooth.  Also, if they kept the same actor for Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) from the X-Men movies, then why did they change actors for Sabretooth?

I think Hugh Jackman did a good job as Wolverine in the first X-Men movies (and I am really looking forward to The Wolverine), so I'm glad that he maintained his role in this movie.  But, I don't like how his character was presented.  There are too many scenes where we should have seen Wolverine's berserker rage, but instead were presented with mild-mannered Logan (almost an emo Logan).

The movie tries too hard to force "comedy" into the scenes, but the result is not amusing.  Humorous scenes can certainly be placed into action and comic-book movies, and can be done so well when they are done in a more natural tone.  But when the "humor" is forced, it does not work out well for anyone.  The scene where Wolverine fights the Blob is absolutely dreadful.

The effects were pretty cheesy at times.  Even Wolverine's claws (which looked great in the first X-Men movies) looked comically fake at times.

If  X-Men Origins: Wolverine is supposed to be a prequel to the first three X-Men movies, then there are far too many inconsistencies.  If it is supposed to be a different line, or a reboot, then there are far too many similarities.

Two of the best characters, Gambit and Wade Wilson/Deadpool, are horribly mishandled.  Even with all of the other problems I had with the movie, if those two had been given decent screen time or had been more developed, I might have actually been ok with the movie overall.  But they try to cram so many characters into the movie that it results in the entire film feeling like it is lacking a well-developed plot or character development.

Recommendation:  Pass.  I had heard bad reviews before watching this movie, but I still held out hope.  With the characters involved, the actors playing the characters, and the foundation from the first (two) X-Men movies, I thought that X-Men Origins: Wolverine had a good bit of potential.  But sadly, nothing was done with that potential.  The acting is far below what I know the actors/actresses are capable of.  The visual effects are far worse than the original movies.  The introduction of new characters fell short, as none of them had any character development.  And there is a litany of inconsistencies (both internally, and in relation to the first three movies).  The best part of the movie for me (possible spoiler?) was that it was left open for a possible Deadpool movie.  Hopefully The Wolverine will handle this character properly, and give us a Wolverine movie that we actually want to see.

Be sure to check back soon for more reviews and recommendations.

-GR

Movie Review: Green Lantern

Green Lantern (2011)
Viewing:  Initial, On Demand
Rating:  2.5/5

Basic plot:  A cocky test pilot, Hal Jordan is given a ring by a dying alien that converts the power of will into physical forms.  With the ring, Hal Jordan becomes one of the Green Lantern Corps, a group of intergalactic guardians who use their rings to combat evil and fear across the galaxy.

I knew a little bit about Green Lantern going into this, but I hadn't really read too many of the comics and I wasn't all that familiar with the cannon.  But, in this case, that was actually a very good thing because it meant that I didn't really have too many expectations.  So, with having less expectations, there was less to disappoint me.  And if there is one word that would sum up this movie for me, disappointing would definitely be it.  It wasn't necessarily an entirely bad movie, but with comic book movies getting increasingly better, the actors/voice-talent they had on board, and a director that has made other movies that I love, it definitely could have been far, far better.

Now, onto the review.  Let's start with the good.  Ryan Reynolds.  I think he's a good actor.  Sure, most of his roles have a smug and sarcastic aspect to them, but I think that he plays it well and I think there is enough variation in his characters to keep it from feeling like he is just playing the same character over and over again.  Also, that bit of dry wit in each of his characters helps to make the character feel more realistic, rather than being over-acted/over-dramatic.  Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about most of the rest of the cast.  Which leads us into the bad.

For the majority of the other actors, primarily those not part of the Green Lantern Corps, the acting seemed on par with soap operas.  Even the most straightforward and (should be) emotionless lines were delivered with DRAMA.  And scenes that should have actually been emotional fell drastically short.  Somehow, "emotion" was translated into "turn away quickly and look down...or up.  Depending on the emotion."  The voice-acting of the Green Lantern Corps (at least, the two or three members of the GLC they actually highlight) is much better than scenes with the human characters, but sadly there just isn't enough of the GLC to make up for the rest of the DRAMA.  The graphics of the GLC weren't have bad either.  At least, they were decent enough that I think I probably would have been much happier for the entire movie to have taken place with the Corps.

The graphics aren't the only reason I wish the movie had focused more on the Corps.  I think that it would have made for a much better story if it had stayed with the GLC and just introduced Hal Jordan into that universe.  But, as it was, they tried to cram too many origin stories into one movie.  Not only did they try to establish the universe of the GLC, but they also tried to explain Hal's world and why he struggles with his own personal demons, and the origin of Paralax, and Hector Hammond (a sort of "mad scientist").  Sure, you need to develop the main character to explain to the audience why he is the person he is.  And sure, you need to establish the GLC to understand the role that Hal Jordan plays in that universe.  And without a villain, Paralax, powerful enough to challenge the GLC, it wouldn't be a very exciting movie.  But the addition of Hammond into the story just made it all feel crowded and underdeveloped.  Rather than taking the time to develop Hammond's motives and understand why he does what he does, they just expect you to believe "oh, he used to have a connection to each of the characters, and now he's evil? ok, cool."  The Robot Devil's critique of Fry's opera in Futurama pretty much sums up my complaint of how Hammond's character was "developed." 



Also, the use of the color palette of green and yellow was way too overdone.  When there are strong color themes (in this case, green = willpower and yellow = fear), the subtle use of color to highlight the corresponding theme can help to make a movie very stylized.  But that is not what happened here.  It seems more like the producers said "they are GREEN lanterns, right?  And the evil dude is yellow, right?  Well, then just make everything in the movie green and yellow.  I said green and yellow!!"

Recommendation:  Pass.  Again, the word that sums up how I feel about this movie is "disappointing."  Ryan Reynolds did a pretty good job at playing Hal Jordan and making the character believable, but most of the rest of the acting was disappointing.  Most of the movie was spent talking about how powerful Paralax is, and how the universe is doomed.  But, there was way too much build up for it to be as anticlimactic as it was.  The graphics were decent, but they could have done so much more.  They mentioned numerous times how the only limitation of the ring was the limitation of the mind, but then they didn't do much to really stretch the imagination.  With Hal being new to the ring, it makes sense that it would take him time to really develop his skills/imagination.  But for the rest of the GLC, their level of imagination was, well...disappointing.

I mentioned in my Thor review how hard it can be to do an origin story well.  And I think that Green Lantern suffered from trying to do too much story, but not enough action.  Or rather, too many story elements, but not an actual developed story.  What is probably the most disappointing thing to me is that the director, Martin Campbell, has also directed some movies that I have really enjoyed.  Specifically, he has directed two of the best (if not THE two best) recent Bond films that have helped to keep the series alive - GoldenEye and Casino Royale.  How can Campbell help to reinvigorate the Bond franchise twice, and then come out with something so underwhelming?

If you are a huge fan (or even just a casual fan) of Green Lantern, you will be disappointed with this movie.  I saw Green Lantern on demand, so I had no access to extras.  I'd be interested in seeing some of the effects that were used.  And I might also enjoy the commentary if Ryan Reynolds was on it.  But, I'm not sure if I enjoyed it enough to add it to my queue to be able to watch the extras.  They did set it up for the possibility of a sequel, but I highly doubt that it did well enough for that to actually happen.  That's a shame, because I think that if they did make a sequel, it would have the potential to be a much stronger film.  With the origin story out of the way, they could focus more on the action, more on the Green Lantern Corps, and more on the imaginative power of the will (hopefully).

-GR