Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter - Movie Review

Directed by Timur Bekmambetov
Screenplay by Seth Grahame-Smith, based on his novel.
Running Time: 105 minutes (1h, 45 mins.)
Rated R (for violence throughout and brief sexuality).
Distributor: 20th Century Fox

Never in my 16 years of living on this earth did I think I would review a film like Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter. Why? While I was one of many who read the book, I didn't think this would come to the big screen. Maybe DVD perhaps, but in theatres?  Studios are way too concious to put a mash-up to the big screen, especially since the last one we got didn't live up to box office expectations (Cowboys & Aliens. It was a mashup of two genres).

Thanks to Fox, Tim Burton, Timur Bekmembetov, the director most North American audiences know for doing Wanted (though I know him for also doing Night Watch and Day Watch), and the author himself, Seth Grahame-Smith, Abe Lincoln's fake secret past is on the big screen. This has already divided critics and audiences: either they're with it or against it.

As for me? For the first hour, I was slightly going against it. The film had a cool opening in the beginning, but as it went by with a quick training montage sequence (probably the quickest I've seen), it slowly died down. The first three or four vampires kills by Lincoln felt so lame and it felt less fun than I wanted it to be. But then, it picked up. It went back to being what I asked for. Like the book, it's kind of smart, in the way that it manages to be historically accurate to everything that happened in the man's life as the 16th president.

Then again, I can get that historical accuracy when Steven Spielberg's upcoming biopic comes out this year, hopefully. Another reason this has divided critics and audiences is because of how the film takes itself seriously. The film didn't need to take itself seriously, that's for sure, but it does and strangely it works. There are times where it turns a little laughable, but overall it works in a strange kind of way that I really can't put my finger on.

For a film that has campy sensibilities, most of the cast pulls off good performances. Benjamin Walker (who people either know for his portrayal of Andrew Jackson, another American president, in the Off Broadway and Broadway incarnations of Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson or for being Meryl Streep's son-in-law) pulls off a breakthrough performance as Lincoln young & old. I was more impressed with Dominic Cooper as Henry, the man who helps Lincoln become the hunter. He has enough charisma, wit and depth for audiences to enjoy his presence on the screen.

Mary Elizabeth Winstead is also pretty game as Mary Todd Lincoln. Anthony Mackie is fine as William Johnson, Rufus Sewell could have done more antagonizing as Adam, but Alan Tudyk? He plays Stephen Douglas, who is as equally important as the others as he is the man Lincoln faces against politically (and the one who was previously engaged to Mary Todd), but he wasn't shown enough so it just seems like he was there for nothing.

As I mentioned before, Timur Bekmambetov is director and co-producer of the film and he's a pretty visual director when it comes to special effects and fight sequences. The visuals are somewhat impressive. I will admit some are a little cheesy (a little unsurprising since this is a film with campy sensibilities). The fight sequences, as repetitive as they can be with the slo-mo thing happening, are pretty good as well (the best one being the train sequence).

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is what it is, love it or hate it, with it or against it: a B movie with an A movie type budget and a somewhat recognizable cast. While the movie has a first half that starts off promising, but slowly dies down, it picks back up in the second, offering what the audience paid to see. There's probably no point of me giving this film a rating since I didn't expect more or less, but since it's necessary, a 6.5 out of 10 will do. This is pretty average camp and that's not a bad thing.

More Films I Forgot to Review

As I did with a previous post, let me review films I recently saw that I forgot to review. All are still in theatres.

Men in Black 3 (7.5/10)
It's a step up from the second film and a twisty storyline, along with hilarious performances (one especially coming from Josh Brolin's impressive younger version of Tommy Lee Jones' Agent K) make this third outing kind of memorable as the first.

Snow White and the Huntsman (6/10)
Nice visuals aside, it's an okay rendition of the classic fairy tale.

Prometheus (7.5/10)
Plot holes aside, the film is a entertaining wonder with great visuals and cool performances, the best one coming from Michael Fassbender.

Brave - Movie Review

Directed by Mark Andrews and Brenda Chapman.
Screenplay by Andrews, Chapman, Steve Purcell and Irene Mecchi, story by Chapman.
Running Time: 93 minutes (1h, 33 mins.)
Rated PG (for some scary action and rude humor)
Distributor: Disney/Pixar

Now this review is going to be short (way shorter than usual) and sweet (ish). Brave didn't fully live up to my expectations of what I would expect from Pixar as the film, despite some of its darker moments, plays it a bit too safe when it comes to the storyline (which thanks to how short this review is I don't have to really reveal). However, it is still entertaining. Beautiful animation as always, nice voicing from the cast (including a feisty one coming out of Kelly Macdonald's Merida), depth and some originality help.

The film gets a 7 out of 10. It's a good film, but being a Pixar film, it just could have been better.

Battleship - Movie Review

Directed by Peter Berg

Written by Jon Hoeber and Erich Hoeber, based on the Hasbro game of the same name.

Running Time: 131 minutes (2h, 11 mins.)

Rated PG-13 (for intense sequences of violence, action and destruction, and for language.)

Distributor: Universal Pictures

Let me start off this review with a question that been in many of movie bloggers' heads since this project was announced: whose idea was this?! Who at Universal convinced the studio to spend $209 million to make a movie based on a Hasbro board game that, I mind you, has no expansion to it (no action figures, animated series, etc.)? What could they possibly do with this unusual source material? Well, add an huge alien invasion (since we don't get enough of those), one of the biggest pop stars in the world, some kind of Friday Night Lights reunion between its director and two of its stars, and a load of explosions. You get a Transformers-looking version of Battleship. It's understandable, considering how much money the Transformers movies made altogether at the box office, but that doesn't mean it can be a good sign.

Taylor Kitsch plays Alex Hopper, a slacker who later becomes a lieutenant in the U.S. Navy. How? We get introduced to Hopper 7 years before in a bar, hitting on a woman named Sam (Brooklyn Decker) and manages to woo her when he breaks into a convienence store to get her a chicken burrito. We find out later on that Sam is the Navy Admiral's daughter who, of course, the superior (or shall I say, boss) of Hopper's big bro Stone (Alexander Skarsgard). Liam Neeson plays the Admiral, by the way. Fed up, Stone forces Alex to join the Navy.

As talented as he is now, Hopper still remains himself. He gets into a fight before the annual RIMPAC naval exercises start and could be discharged after the exercises are over. If only he could redeem himself...? That, my dear reader, is where the aliens come into earth. First they attack Hong Kong, then make their way to where the three boats are: Hawaii. From there mayhem ensues and blah, blah, blah...

I just want to add that the aliens come in for no particular reason, which one of a few (well, a little more than a few) problems this film carries. Another problem is its hokey dialogue, which is more said in the second half of its 2:11 running time. The movie could have also been trimmed more. The biggest problem, however was Rihanna. When it comes to this film (and as much as I never would hear these words come out of my mouth), she's a better singer than she is an actor. She doesn't say her lines with a lot of vigour. She just...says them, which I wasn't really surprised with.

At least Brooklyn Decker acts fine in this, and might I remind you, she made her film debut in an Adam Sandler flick (no, not Jack & Jill. The one before it.) Taylor Kitsch was okay, but he was better in John Carter (which as we know by the movie's dismal box office numbers, not enough people saw). Skarsgard isn't there as much. I won't reveal why. And Neeson...what's there say about him? He's awesome, but he doesn't enough screen time.

Peter Berg is behind the camera on this film, though it obviously looks more a Michael Bay film. And Michael Bay had no involvement with this film whatsoever. He reunites with Kitsch, who made his name on Friday Nights Lights, the show Berg developed from the movie he directed which in turn was based on a book. Another FNL co-star Jesse Plemons provides some of the film's comic relief. Sadly though, comedy takes a backseat in this. My guess is that it needed more comedy. The serious tone of the film (more so in the second half) doesn't really work.

Battleship is overall not a bad film. It was most of what I expected it to be: loud, mindless and fun. It lives up to be that, though that slowly starts to disappear in the second half, then when it comes to the end, slowly starts to come back to what it was made to be. I can't ignore that the problems that plague it though. At 131 minutes, it's a little too long, the serious tone that consumes the second half should've been gone and it does have lines that frankly, I've heard before. On the positive note, besides Rihanna's "performance", the acting isn't bad, the action sequences are pretty epic and the visual effects are top notch. These keep the film from really sinking. A 5 out of 10 will do. I will add this however. No matter what anyone thinks about the film, good or bad, it serves as a good example of why you shouldn't make movies out of board games, especially ones that don't have a story.

The Avengers, The Hunger Games and Other Films I Forgot to Review

As you can tell, I've missed out on reviewing a lot of films over the past few months either 'cause I've been in writer's block or I just didn't feel like it, which is normally what I should not be doing as a blogger. And I saw these films too. I'll give my rating for them, as well as one to a few sentences to explain my reasoning behind it. I'll go through each month. Some of these films are already out or coming to Blu-ray/DVD, some still in theatres.

January
Shame - 8/10: Despite all the hype due to Michael Fassbender's lead character *ahem* ing everything in sight, this is the least sexiest film I've seen. It just makes sex a little scary. Fassbender (in his second collaboration with director Steve McQueen) and Carey Mulligan deliver the hell out of this movie though.

February
Safe House - 7/10: A nicely made action-thriller with strong performances from Denzel Washington, Ryan Reynolds and Brendon Gleeson. (Coming to Blu-ray/DVD, On Demand and Digital Download June 5th.)

The Vow - 7/10: It's predictable and what was supposed to be unmemorable is somewhat the opposite with fine performances from its cast. (Out now on Blu-ray/DVD, On Demand and Digital Download)

March
Dr. Seuss' The Lorax - 5.5/10: While the environmental message that made the book so memorable is still there and voices are good, but the message is so kiddie'd down it lacks the fiery fever that fueled the book and the musical numbers, all except one, do not help. (Date unknown for BR/DVD, OD and DD)

John Carter - 7/10: While the film is not without its faults (Lynn Collins' performance is an example), the film is pulpy sci-fi fun. (Out on BR/DVD, OD and DD June 5th.)

Project X - 6.5/10: It's not that original and kinda mean-spirited, but Project X takes the teen party movie to another level. Most importantly, it feels real. (Out on BR/DVD, OD and DD June 19th)

The Hunger Games - 7.5/10: I read the book, so... (Still in theatres)

April
American Reunion - 7/10: It's nice to see everyone from the original three films (not those crappy direct-to-dvd sequels) back and while this new installment is a little stale, it still benefits from good performances and another good blend of raunchy humor and sweet moments. (Out on BR/DVD, OD and DD July 10th)

And now for the big kahuna...
The Avengers - I waited in line for half-an-hour just to get the good seats (and it wasn't the 3D version, by the way), my expectations were high and it absolutely lived up to them. Fantastic action, humor and performances help make the movie as memorable as it should be. The film gets an outstanding 9 out of 10 from me. (Still in theatres, making a billion worldwide. Coming to BR/DVD, OD and DD September 25th.)

The Five-Year Engagement - Movie Review

Directed by Nicholas Stoller

Written by Jason Segel and Nicholas Stoller

Running Time: 124 minutes (2h, 4 mins.)

Rated R (for sexual content, and language throughout.)
Distributor: Universal Pictures

After two great collaborations together, whether it was bringing back The Muppets or giving us the ultimate romantic disaster movie (Forgetting Sarah Marshall), actor/screenwriter Jason Segel and screenwriter/director Nicholas Stoller team up once again with producer Judd Apatow to give us The Five-Year Engagement, the unusual-but-ambitious story of a couple's engagement that spans half a decade due to the complications in their lives.

The movie starts out all and well for Tom Solomon (Segel) and Violet Barnes (Emily Blunt), but when Violet gets a post-doctorate job at the University of Michigan, Tom goes from his high-paying job at a fancy San Francisco restaurant to serving sandwiches in Michigan. From there, Tom starts to lose his mind, Violet's sister Susie (Alison Brie) marries Tom's best friend Alex (Chris Pratt) as they already hooked up at the engagement party, and the main couple transition from happy to depressed.

The Five-Year Engagement strays away from being just another formulaic rom-com. Not only does the Apatow-style of humor help, but shades of unexpected dark humor help as well. So does the performances from its talented ensemble cast. Segel and Blunt have believable chemistry. As does Pratt and Brie, two standouts. Rhys Ifans, Jacki Weaver, Mindy Kaling, Kevin Hart, Mimi Kennedy, David Paymer, Lauren Weedman, Chris Parnell, Brian Posehn and Dakota Johnson fill the rest of the ensemble with equally engaging supporting roles.

It doesn't beat Forgetting (or to a lesser extent, Get Him to the Greek, since that was a spinoff of Forgetting) and it is a little longer than it should be (which, like Tom & Violet's relationship, can strain even the plot a bit), but The Five-Year Engagement is still solid.

Rating: 7/10.

21 Jump Street - Movie Review

Directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller
Screenplay by Michael Bacall, story by Jonah Hill and Michael Bacall.
Running Time: 109 minutes (1h, 49 mins.)
Rated R (for crude and sexual content, pervasive language, drug material, teen drinking and some violence).
Distributor: Sony (Columbia Pictures)/MGM

...And the '80's remakes/reboots/throwbacks continue. We had many last year and it seems like the trend ain't gonna stop this year. 21 Jump Street, a remake of the late-80's television series about a group of police officers who could pass as teenagers with their youthful appearances and go undercover to investigate crimes in high schools and colleges, kicks it off. What's funny about it is that it's a comedy based on a show that wasn't a comedy. Does that make it a spoof? No. This film is much funnier than your regular spoof.

This Jump Street has Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum (both who are also executive producers) playing former high school classmates who meet again at a police academy. Hill plays Schmidt, who was a nerd, and Tatum plays Jenko, who was the jock.  After an arrest gone awry, the two men are reassigned to a specialty division revived from the '80's at 21 Jump Street (hence the title). Schmidt and Jenko then go undercover as students in a local high school to investigate a drug ring and discover that high school isn't the same as it was for them a few years ago.

Straying away from its source material, 21 Jump Street is filled with raunchy humor and silliness all around, and also makes nods to the original show (even two of the show's original stars, Johnny Depp and Peter DeLuise have hilarious cameos in the film). Hill and Tatum are hilarious. Who would've thought the comedy pairing of these two would work the way it did? Like all of the other films he's done, Hill has great comedy timing, but Tatum is a bit of a surprise. He has plenty of comedic chops that might surprise those who see him as an actor who's just the romantic lead. Ice Cube is memorable in the screen time he has, Dave Franco still has good comedic chops as proven in his role on the last season of Scrubs, Brie Larson plays a nice love interest to Hill's character and Rob Riggle is funny, but not as funny as he usually is.

The directors are Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, the duo behind Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs. They inject some of the style that made Cloudy such a winner in here, most notably in a scene where Hill & Tatum's characters are on the new synthetic drugs. It's inventive, a little animated and of course, funny. Screenwriters Jonah Hill and Michael Bacall show their love for the pop culture of today's generation while at the same time making fun of it. Environmentalism, Glee, you name it, it's there.

We've had a few disappointing comedies so far this year, but 21 Jump Street is an exception, thankfully. It's raunchy, inventive, silly, over the top and laugh-out-loud hilarious. For those who expect a bad farce, prepare to be shocked. I give the film *** (3 stars).