White House Down (2013)

3/5

Stop me if you've heard this one before: a terrorist plot to overtake a building is thwarted by a lone off-duty officer behind enemy lines. No, it's not Die Hard. It's White House Down. If you want to put it in a positive light, you can call it an homage or a re-envisioning. If you want to hate on it, you can call it a blatant rip-off. In truth, it probably lies somewhere in between, and it might have worked if Emmerich were a superior director.

The casting is the best part of the movie. Channing Tatum nearly matches Bruce Willis in terms of his on-screen presence and comic timing. (I say this knowing full well that I'll be blasted as a blasphemer or a Tatum fanboy.) But Emmerich takes it one step further by adding Jamie Foxx into the mix, turning it into a buddy movie with an undeniable chemistry between the two leads. It seems like it has all the right ingredients for success, but it just doesn't have that special sauce. Emmerich directs the action just a little too over-the-top. Even I could not suspend my disbelief (and this coming from someone who recently saw Fast & Furious 6). The bad guys are unoriginal and bland, even before comparing them to Die Hard and the inimitable Alan Rickman. The movie sags at around the 2/3 mark and it never manages to pick up the pace after that (even with the unnecessarily ludicrous plot twist at the end). For those of you that don't know, this is basically the exact opposite of what you want in an action movie.

Whereas Die Hard was a classic, White House Down will quickly fade out of our collective memory. That's okay though. It served its purpose as a summer blockbuster popcorn flick. It's entertaining enough for an action movie and I don't feel like I wasted my money. Just don't let the similarities to a much better movie get your hopes up.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2334879/

Fast & Furious (2009)

2/5

Fast & Furious is a movie I started watching around midnight, extremely tired, and it was not exciting enough to prevent me from nodding off several times throughout. It's a much-needed reboot of the franchise after the almost-universally maligned Tokyo Drift. While the following two sequels (Fast Five and Fast & Furious 6) are more traditional action films, this one maintains its origins as a street racing movie and sprinkles a touch of drug running into the mix. I can't say I remember much of the plot, but I think it's safe to say that it was pretty standard for this type of film (i.e., forgettable). The script was bland and the acting was limp. And, unlike the later sequels, it didn't have The Rock to save it. If only Fast & Furious 6 weren't so amazing, then I wouldn't have felt compelled to come back and revisit the whole series.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1013752/

Fast & Furious 6 (2013)

5/5

Fast & Furious 6 is a shot of adrenaline straight to the heart. It is non-stop excitement from beginning to end, perfectly paced without a single misstep. Its story continues right where Fast Five left off and never pauses for a second. It's filled with a fair number of plot twists and, partly because it sheds its underground street racing roots, it keeps you engaged until the gut-shot preview of Fast Seven. But the plot is not why you see this movie. You watch it for the way it collects all the coolest characters from the previous movies and assembles them into an Avengers-style superhero team. They team up against an especially cruel and evil villain (Evans) who has some devious tricks up his sleeve (i.e., those bad-ass "flip cars").

The action scenes are more often than not obscenely absurd, but even at their most extreme they are more intelligible than the fast-cut close-up style permeating more traditional action movies. Stunts remain more visceral experiences than CGI action, and this movie serves as the perfect example. The car chases are riveting, the fistfights are thrilling. I was honestly on the edge of my seat, heart pumping, holding my breath for two whole hours. And the movie manages all this with a levity and comedy that work (against all odds) to shape it into a well-balanced piece of entertainment. Yes, the characters are archetypes without any complexity. But their one note-ness gives them charm and focus and sympathy. I found myself so invested in the characters and what happened to them that I couldn't stop myself from jumping out of my seat and yelling yeah! in the middle of the theater. And I did not feel embarrassed at all. I never thought I'd be saying any of this about a Fast & Furious movie, but color me surprised. Fast & Furious 6 is one of the most engrossing action movies I've seen--ever--and I cannot wait to see it again.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1905041/

The Son of No One (2011)

2/5

The Son of No One is a middling and uninspired character study of a rookie cop with a dark past and a ridiculous mustache. Tatum plays Officer White to utter mediocrity. He is unlikable, unsympathetic, and bland. All the other characters are even less appealing. The story is straightforward to the point of mind-numbing simplicity. Dito Montiel's directing is remarkable only because he manages to stretch out a 30-minute short story into a feature-length film by filling it with long pauses and shots of people deep in thought. The one thing I commend Montiel for is achieving a phenomenally dark atmosphere and tense mood throughout. It kept me on the edge of my seat, although I felt foolish for doing so after discovering the big picture. The mood, while well-done, placed an unnecessary heaviness on the film and made it altogether too dreary and depressing. I would avoid this hodgepodge of mediocrity unless you're a huge Channing Tatum fan (and even then you'll probably be disappointed by his silly facial hair and flat acting).

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535612/

Now You See Me (2013)

4/5

Now You See Me is a deliciously devious con/heist movie with an engaging cast of characters and compelling story. A group of four magicians (Eisenberg, Harrelson, Fisher, Franco) are brought together by a mysterious stranger to perform a series of grand illusions, with the ultimate goal of Robin Hood-esque bank-robbing. A local cop (Ruffalo) and Interpol officer (Laurent) chase after them, wondering the whole time what their true motives are. And what their final act will be.

What makes this movie so fun is the sense of wonder you get watching the actors perform. The movie is not so much about magic as it is about deception, manipulation, and subverting expectations. You don't really concern yourself with how the illusions were performed--instead you find yourself focusing on the misdirection and the acting. Eisenberg delivers arrogance to perfection (only to be outdone by Freeman's know-it-all cockiness). Franco endears with his youthful charm and innocence, making him the most sympathetic character in the whole movie.

Now You See Me is riveting from beginning to end, thanks to a well-crafted story and well-paced editing. But the film ultimately fails in the finale. The big reveal at the end is terribly unsatisfying. Quite frankly, the twist just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Yes, it is possible for everything to be explained as it was, but it is fantastically absurd and illogical. It feels as if it were written in an effort to confuse and surprise the audience, not in an effort to be true to the world it creates. But, strangely enough, none of that changes my enjoyment of the film. It is still eminently watchable and utterly delightful.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1670345/

Men In Black 3 (2012)

4/5

Men In Black 3 is the sequel that nobody asked for and that everybody was surprised by. It offers an origin story for both leads that brings complexity and depth to the characters, making them more authentic and infinitely more heartwarming. You wouldn't expect that from a simple sci-fi action comedy--and you wouldn't expect for it to be done so expertly--but it gives us all that on top of everything else that makes the series so watchable. Past all the superfluous and silly special effects, past all the precisely-delivered one-liners, past all the action and excitement, the movie leaves an indelible mark in your memory because it plucks the heartstrings so powerfully. Honestly, seeing that finale just made my heart drop a little. How can you not feel something when you discover what turned Josh Brolin into Tommy Lee Jones? That small, perfect moment at the end is what makes Men In Black 3 the best of the series. And what makes me want to see it again and again.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1409024/

Journey 2: The Mysterious Island (2012)

2/5

Journey 2: The Mysterious Island is a fairly tame 3D adventure flick for kids. The movie is a sequel because it takes place after another movie and has the same main character, but it actually requires no knowledge of the previous film to enjoy it. (Or not enjoy it, if you want to be snarky.) The problems start with the story, which is outright silly. The problems continue with special effects that already look outdated, combined with an incessant use of 3D objects coming out of the screen at you. The story follows a self-proclaimed "Vernian," someone who believes that all of Jules Verne's novels describe real places. The titular island, which houses tiny elephants and gigantic bees, is actually a day away from submerging and becoming Atlantis, which provides the perfect impetus to turn this scientific exploration into an action adventure. The story elements, from the budding romance to the stepfather-son bonding, all felt like checkboxes that producers filled out in an attempt to sell more tickets. The movie's saving grace was Dwayne Johnson, who was able to provide both believable action and comic relief. He is the only reason to see this movie. He is able to add a star to just about any movie just by being in it.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1397514/

Star Trek: Into Darkness (2013)

4/5

Star Trek: Into Darkness is a phenomenally thrilling summer blockbuster and not much more. This time, the intrepid crew of the USS Enterprise finds themselves thrust unwittingly into the midst of a budding intergalactic war that could end with Earth's destruction. The villain is a genetically-engineered super-human (Cumberbatch) who has nothing but vengeance on his mind. Taking place a short time after the first one, the characters have not grown or matured at all since we last saw them. They are as familiar and simplistic as they were previously, with flat personalities and predictable motivations.

But the movie is better than its predecessor thanks to a more engaging story and more exciting action. The plot is nothing to write home about, but it propels the characters forward with nigh unstoppable velocity. The cinematography is fraught with the same ubiquitous lens flares that plagued the previous film. The real surprise--for me, at least--is Cumberbatch. He is charming but devious, cunning but friendly, repulsive but inviting. He makes the movie stand out, and I can't wait to see him in more stuff (Sherlock is next on my long list of TV shows to watch).

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1408101/

Hitchcock (2012)

3/5

Hitchcock tells the story of the titular director's decision to make Psycho, and the personal and professional challenges that came alongside it. As a whole, the movie is entertaining fare. But I think the problem is that the movie doesn't know its audience. Is it for Hitchcock fans? Psycho fans? movie fans? Who knows? It provides a teeny glimpse into the great director's life, but not nearly enough to satisfy. In fact, I would venture to say that the movie is more about Mrs. Hitchcock than about Mr. Hitchcock (and Mirren absolutely shines in her role). That wasn't exactly what I had in mind when I decided to rent the movie, so I was left with a perfectly fine movie that I wasn't expecting and didn't hate. If you decide to watch it, just know what you're getting into and you'll probably be able to enjoy it more.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0975645/