John Wick (2014)

2/5

John Wick is a pretty silly movie. The conceit of the film is that a well-known assassin named John Wick (Reeves) retires from the killing business for a woman (Moynahan) who ends up dying of an unknown chronic disease. When a seemingly random crime takes away the final gift from his late wife, Wick returns to his violent past on a quest for vengeance.

The movie has a few unique aspects, but is otherwise drab and uninspired. What's cool? The video game-like action and the snippets of comedy. It didn't feel like other shoot-em-up action flicks; it felt like a shoot-em-up action game. And it never takes itself too seriously, throwing in hilarious jokes at its own expense. Sometimes it feels overly silly, but it works more often than I would have expected. What's poor? Everything else. The movie starts in media res for no other reason than that it's commonplace now. It adds nothing to the excitement or the plot; if anything it flattens and compresses the story's progression. The script is full of cliched one-liners delivered with surprising blandness coming from the somewhat well-respected actors. There is no build-up to an explosive finale. It just continues from one random action scene to the next, with perhaps the coolest one being the first one. All in all, I cannot recommend this film to even the most diehard of Keanu Reeves fans.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2911666/

Kung Fu Panda (2008)

4/5

Kung Fu Panda is a delightful animated comedy about a panda (Jack Black) in ancient China who dreams about kung fu but is stuck making noodles for his father. When happenstance names him the Dragon Warrior, he must train with his idols, the Furious Five, under the tutelage of Master Shifu (Dustin Hoffman) in order to save the town from the recently escaped Tai Lung (Ian McShane). He must fight against his comrades' prejudices and his own insecurity to fulfill his destiny as the Dragon Warrior. Yes, the plot is pretty simple, but it had a very good "believe in yourself, be an individual" message that suburban parents love having their kids hear.

The acting and music were adequate. The real joy of watching this movie was in the wonderfully comic moments and the exquisitely choreographed fights. The animators understood that they were unrestrained by a physical camera and took advantage of that fact to do impossible angles, slow motion, and long takes that enhanced the humor and fun. The compositions and movement within each frame flowed seamlessly with the tight editing. While WALL-E tried to make itself seem filmed, Kung Fu Panda made sure you knew it was animated. For that reason alone, I think I prefer Kung Fu Panda to WALL-E. It may not be as memorable or timeless, but it's certainly a step in the right direction as far as CGI is concerned. If you want solid entertainment, consistent laughs, and a chance to see animation exploring its limits, make sure you check this movie out.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0441773/

The Golden Compass (2007)

3/5

I read these books a while back and really liked them. I never fell in love with them like a fanboy, but I appreciated the depth of characters and mature content usually absent in "children's books." Those are almost precisely the things this movie lacked. It was a children's movie without the adult themes and complex characters. And yet somehow it managed to stay too faithful to the book. There was no adaptation involved; instead it compacted every single important event in the book and shoved it into this movie, which made everything seem forced and outright ridiculous. Moreover, the world they imagined was so different from what I had imagined. It was futuristic with blue balls of energy powering everything. What is that? When I read the book I imagined it was just London in present day. Another qualm is the CGI. I hated it. Filmmakers depend on it too much; it seems as if they don't even shoot anything anymore. It's just not believable.

But to be fair, I did find myself enjoying it a lot. The bear fight scene was awesome, and there were some parts that were really exciting. There's nothing really terrible about the movie, just frustrating. It's irritating when you see good material treated sloppily. Don't go out and see it if you can avoid it. Save yourself a whole lot of ire and just read (or re-read) the books.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0385752/

Sexy Beast (2000)

2/5

Sexy Beast is an intriguing film for many reasons. It is brave stylistically, its characters are off-the-wall, and the plot construction is bizarre. These three elements only work half the time; the other half you're left confused. The actors give it their all, though, and Ben Kingsley gives an entirely frightening performance. You laugh and shiver at the same time. It's quite possibly the darkest comedy I've ever seen (although not exactly the most effective one). There are numerous audio problems throughout. The tension often deflates for no real reason; the scene just ends. For a crime movie, there is surprisingly little crime. It spends too much time attempting to make its characters unique to the point that they become caricatures.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0203119/

Scoop (2006)

4/5

I saw this new Woody Allen comedy yesterday with Sameer and I must say, I was impressed. I laughed a lot. It was extremely funny in that New York/Woody Allen style that he's perfected over the years (fantastic one-liners), even though he saves most of the humor for himself. Scarlett Johansson plays a dumb but dedicated student journalist as best she can, but Allen's writing for that part just wasn't very convincing. Fortuitously, the failure of the role's realism gave the movie a more airy, light-hearted feel that helped overall. I liked the small reference to Match Point where Johansson pretends to be an actress. One thing I was especially fond of was how the movie comes full circle and ends up back where it started (on the River Styx); something about that just feels sublime to me.

The special effects distracted from the movie, besides just looking campy and 80's. Hugh Jackman's character was simply a poor rehashing of the upper class family from Match Point, and Allen didn't really do much to make him unique in any way, shape, or form. Also, some elements of the plot just don't add up, but who cares? It's a movie.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0457513/