'It Follows' Alan, But Then What?

Starring

• Maika Monroe
• Keir Gilchrist
• Daniel Zovatto
• Jake Weary
• Olivia Luccardi
• Lili Sepe

Original Theatrical Release Date: 03/13/2015

Running Time: 100 mins

Synopsis: After a strange sexual encounter, a teenager finds herself haunted by nightmarish visions and the inescapable sense that something is after her. --From Rotten Tomatoes

Review: I love horror movies. That is no surprise to anyone. But even I will admit the genre is bogged down by cliches and trite plots. So imagine my interest when a new horror movie comes out to critical acclaim. I'm thinking this flick is going to be the one that changes the face of modern horror as we know it. Saying I was excited to see this movie is an understatement. So, did it live up to the hype?

I don't know how to be more blunt than what I am going to say. 'It Follows' is a terrible movie. From the wooden acting to the asinine storyline, it was a complete waste of time. There were several times during the movie that I was tempted to leave. But every time I convinced myself to stay because there had to be something that all these critics saw that redeemed it somehow. So I stayed until the very end. And as the end credits rolled, so did my eyes. My intelligence had been insulted. 

Let's start with the basic gist of the movie. A guy has sex with a girl and in doing so passes the titular 'It' to her. It's something you never actually really see, except in the guise of a person that does just as the title says. It follows the girl. She gets creeped out, while creeping her posse out in the process, and they get in a car and drive off. Until it shows up again and follows her some more, at which point, she just runs again. The guy who gave her this 'It' thing told her the only way to stop it was to sleep with someone else and pass it to them. Then you find out that doesn't entirely do the trick. Because if 'It' kills the next person she sleeps with, then it comes back to her, and then if she dies, goes to who gave it to her and so forth. 

So yes, the plot was just ridiculously stupid. Next we get to the cast. I don't expect a bunch of A-list stars in a B-movie horror movie. But could we try a little harder at the casting call and maybe get some people who have talent? 'Sharknado' had a better lineup, and that had Tara Reid in it. The characters were flat. And the actors and actresses portraying them didn't do anything to make them interesting or relatable in the least bit.

There is one quality of the movie that I liked, and that was the score. Yes, the only thing I liked at all about the movie was the music. It had a great 80's horror vibe to it. It actually would've been great accompanying a good movie. 

Believe the critics if you want. Go waste $10 or $15. There really isn't a better way to say it than what I've already said. It is a terrible, terrible movie. I have seen people popping their cysts on YouTube that had me more on the edge of my seat than this junk. I don't think I have ever hated a movie theater experience as much as I did this one, and I saw 'Halloween: Resurrection' in theaters. 

Score: 

Alan Time Jumps with the X-Men in 'Days of Future Past'

Starring

• James McAvoy
• Michael Fassbender
• Hugh Jackman
• Jennifer Lawrence
• Patrick Stewart
• Ian McKellan
• Peter Dinklage
• Halle Berry

Original Theatrical Release Date: 05/23/2014

Running Time: 131 mins

Synopsis: The ultimate X-Men ensemble fights a war for the survival of the species across two time periods in X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST. The beloved characters from the original "X-Men" film trilogy join forces with their younger selves from the past, "X-Men: First Class," in order to change a major historical event and fight in an epic battle that could save our future. --From Rotten Tomatoes

Review: The X-Men franchise has had its ups and downs, with 'X2: X-Men United' probably being considered the best by most, and 'X-Men: The Last Stand' and 'X-Men Origins: Wolverine' faring among the worst. I, personally, liked all four of the 'X-Men' movies, and found both of the solo Wolverine outings a bit disappointing. But all in all, I'm a fan of the series as a whole. And if you are, then you're in for a treat.

'Days of Future Past' isn't as good as the previous installments. It's better. The storyline involves a somewhat dystopian future where machines called Sentinels are sent out to eradicate mutants. The plan backfires on the humans to a point, as the Sentinels not only target mutants, but they start targeting regular humans that do carry the necessary genetics to pass along to their potential mutant offspring. There doesn't seem to be a split between good and bad mutants in this future, as Professor Xavier and Magneto (played again by Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan) are working together to try to stop this from happening. Enter Ellen Page as Kitty Pryde who uses her powers to send Wolverine's conscious back into the body of his younger self. This is where the series of course starts to merge the original series with the 'First Class' series. His objective is to partner with Professor X and Magneto of the past (James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender) to stop Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) from killing the creator of the Sentinels, as her actions are pretty much what causes this terrible future. From that point, you just watch the Butterfly Effect take hold as different actions cause aspects of history to change. To see if it pans out, you'll have to see the movie for yourself. 

I was completely engaged the entire time. But that isn't saying that this new 'X-Men' isn't without its flaws. It's hard to tell whether this is a sequel, or a reboot. I know the cast is the same. So it should be a sequel, right? Well, therein lies the problem. 'Days of Future Past' does acknowledge bits and pieces of the previous movies. But it also completely ignores others. If director Bryan Singer had decided to completely retcon, or ignore the events of, 'X-Men: The Last Stand' and 'X-Men Origins: Wolverine', erasing them from the canon, that would be one thing. But the continuity will definitely make you scratch your head in confusion. How is X alive? How did Y get this power? And so forth. So the movie forces you to remember the moments of the older movies that are referenced in this one, and pretty much throw the rest out of the window. 

If you're wanting an excellent 'X-Men' film, you have it in 'Days of Future Past'. Not since 'X2' has the series been this exciting. And while I do wish some of the continuity was explained or addressed, I'm also okay with just going with the flow and seeing what the franchise has in store for it next. 'Days of Future Past' has a great story, great cast (including cameos from earlier stars of the series), and astounding special effects. With a year full of superhero movies, 'X-Men: Days of Future Past' ranks as the best one for me thus far. 

Score: 

Is 'Amazing Spider-Man 2' Just That, or Does it Fall Flat?

Starring

• Andrew Garfield
• Emma Stone
• Jamie Foxx
• Sally Field
• Dane DeHaan

Original Theatrical Release Date: 05/02/2014

Running Time: 142 mins

Synopsis: We've always known that Spider-Man's most important battle has been within himself: the struggle between the ordinary obligations of Peter Parker and the extraordinary responsibilities of Spider-Man. But in The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Peter Parker finds that a greater conflict lies ahead. It's great to be Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield). For Peter Parker, there's no feeling quite like swinging between skyscrapers, embracing being the hero, and spending time with Gwen (Emma Stone). But being Spider-Man comes at a price: only Spider-Man can protect his fellow New Yorkers from the formidable villains that threaten the city. With the emergence of Electro (Jamie Foxx), Peter must confront a foe far more powerful than he. And as his old friend, Harry Osborn (Dane DeHaan), returns, Peter comes to realize that all of his enemies have one thing in common: OsCorp.  --From Rotten Tomatoes

Review: So it goes without saying that I'm a big Spider-Man fan. He's been my favorite superhero since I was a kid. And Sam Raimi's 'Spider-Man' trilogy not only belongs to my favorite superhero movies, but my favorite movies in general. Yes, I even really enjoyed the third one that everyone else on the planet seems to hate, even if it was my least favorite of them. 

One of my biggest issues with the reboot series is that it isn't necessary. While I liked the first installment, I felt like the better parts of it still weren't better than the worst parts of the original trilogy. I've had people tell me not to compare the two, but considering 'Spider-Man 3' came out a mere seven years ago, it seems kind of hard not to when that series is so fresh in my mind. I'd probably think differently if that set of flicks were terrible. But they weren't. THEY were the amazing Spider-Man movies. And the actual 'The Amazing Spider-Man' was decent, but failed to live up to the superior version.

'The Amazing Spider-Man 2' pretty much falls in the same exact category. It was good. But that's all it was. There were some things this sequel did that bested it's predecessor, and there were some things that were most definitely worse. I'll start off with the good. Andrew Garfield was much better in this movie. In his first run in the red and blue spandex, his Peter Parker wasn't really that likable. He was kind of arrogant, and just not the geek-to-hero character I've always envisioned as Peter Parker. But in the sequel, his portrayal of Parker isn't so moody. Emma Stone pretty much turns whatever she touches into gold, and her and Garfield's chemistry is spot-on, much more so than it was the last go round. 

The special effects were mind-blowingly good. Every time I see a new 'Spider-Man' movie, I literally sit in awe at just how great it looks seeing Spider-Man web sling through the city. And Electro's scenes were just as awe-inspiring to look at.  

So now to the negative. My first complaint is the story and script. Jamie Foxx's Electro storyline with him pretty much being obsessed with whoever gives him attention was just annoying and boring. He had the cheesiest dialogue. Jamie Foxx is a great actor. This movie wouldn't really support that statement. A lot of his dialogue made me have flashbacks to Joel Schumacher's train-wreck 'Batman & Robin'. I don't think Jamie Foxx was the problem, but his material was just lame. Harry Osbourne was severely miscast. All of you who griped about "Emo Peter" in 'Spider-Man 3'? Wait until you catch a drift of the guy who replaced James Franco. Dane DeHaan... He wasn't just a bad Harry Osbourne/Green Goblin. I don't think he's a very good actor period. The found-footage 'Chronicle' movie that I heard everyone raving about? Yeah, I wasn't impressed. So far, he is probably my biggest complaint about the new series. 

There's many pros and cons to this movie. One of the scenes at the end of the movie is probably one of the most heartfelt and tragic between both series. The score still wasn't as good as Danny Elfman's, even with Marc Webb bringing in Hans Zimmer to replace James Horner. Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone had great screen chemistry. But still not as good as Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst. Spider-Man's witty one-liners were on the whole pretty amusing. Everyone else's were just bad. The backstory of Peter's parents was a good touch. The special effects were just spectacular, despite the fact that the slow-motion feature was overkilled. 

If you thought 'The Amazing Spider-Man' was better than the Raimi series, you'll like this one equally as much. If you're like me, and you liked it but still would've preferred a 'Spider-Man 4' to continue the original series, you'll probably like this one too, but it won't convince you that this reboot was a terrific idea. And if you haven't liked any of the Spidey flicks so far, you'll like this one even less. 

Score: 

Alan's Look Back at the Movies of 2013, and What Does 2014 Have in Store?

Let me preface this by saying that the ten movies I listed here, I am not claiming to be THE best movies of 2013. Admittedly, a lot of the big movies I had anticipated on seeing, I have yet to watch. I have the blu-rays of most of them, but the Mrs. gets irritated when I watch a movie she wants to see without her, even though every time I suggest one, she doesn't want to watch it. Haha. So I have yet to see 'Star Trek Into Darkness', or 'World War Z', or 'The Wolverine', or...

So with that being said, out of what I actually managed to see this year, these were my favorites.

10. This Is the End

This movie started a LITTLE bit slow for me, but once it got going, it was so over the top and ridiculous that I couldn't help but laugh. The last half of the movie is definitely better than the first, but overall, it was just a fun movie. The actors all playing fictionalized versions of themselves was hilarious. Emma Watson, from 'Harry Potter' fame, to me had some of the funniest parts. Maybe it's because it was just more shocking hearing some of the stuff coming out of the mouth of Hermoine.

9. The Heat

Sometimes I love Sandra Bullock and sometimes I shake my head in disbelief at some of the crap she agrees to do. This one would be a case of the former. Bullock is an FBI agent while Melissa McCarthy is a cop. Bullock's character is very by the book while McCarthy's character definitely has some questionable tactics. But the movie was pretty much hilarious from start to finish. The real star was McCarthy, who has really departed from that squeaky clean 'Gilmore Girls' role. Highly recommend this one.

8. Iron Man 3

 'Iron Man 3' was probably my least favorite in the series. I think there were some issues in the story that were unnecessary and some were just a little dumb. I have to get this out. Not just in this movie, but in pretty much every movie that has one, I hate the whole "kid sidekick" thing. It's annoying. To me, it always seems like a kid is just tossed into a story so that the movie itself will appeal to kids. "Hey, that kid can be Iron Man's lackey, maybe I can too". Small detail, but it irked me. And there was a "twist" in this film that I didn't particularly care for concerning the villain. But I don't want to spoil anything. Gwyneth Paltrow has her biggest role in the series in this installment and admittedly, she's pretty badass in it. Robert Downey, Jr. IS Tony Stark so there's no way he wouldn't be excellent in it. The overall big story was really good, and the scenes at the end were just amazing to watch.

7. The Lone Ranger

Apparently I am in the minority here. Critics panned the movie. Many friends of mine told me to steer clear. My anticipation for watching it had somewhat dwindled away to nothing and then one night I reluctantly watched it. And I loved it. Johnny Depp as Tonto was brilliant acting as always. And Armie Hammer as the Lone Ranger, I thought, was fantastic as well. Many complaints were that the Lone Ranger was more wussy in this movie than he's "supposed" to be. Well, for starters, I know bits and pieces of the original Lone Ranger, because to say it was before my time is an understatement. So I can't really compare the two interpretations of the titular character. What I can say is that I thought the story was believable. The guy starts as a lawyer, and becomes a vigilante of sorts, with no previous dealings with upholding the law. So I would expect someone in that predicament to make a few mistakes, be a little clumsy, not be the perfect hero. And that's what he was. A normal guy who decides to get justice. I'm just saying, if I were to put on a mask and try to beat up bad guys tomorrow, it probably wouldn't go so well for me either.

6. Monsters University

 'Monsters University' was a fun movie. It was even one of the better Pixar films from the past couple of years. But in my opinion, it still didn't hold up to the likes of 'Toy Story 3' or 'Finding Nemo', or even it's predecessor 'Monsters, Inc'. With that being said, it went back in the right direction. If for nothing else, it was a nice nostalgic trip with some familiar faces, and it was enjoyable. Sadly, there will not be a new Pixar release until 2015, where we get not one, but two new features from the computer animation kings.

5. Man of Steel

I really left 'Man of Steel' with so many mixed opinions and emotions, that I'm not really sure whether my little write-up here will convince anyone to watch it or stay far away from it. Let me start with the bad. 'Batman Begins' created a new kind of superhero. One that was dark, moody and dramatic. And that works for Batman, because of his backstory and his style alone. But just because it worked for Batman, doesn't mean that every superhero movie needs to follow that dark formula. That was one of my biggest complaints about 2012's 'The Amazing Spider-Man'. And 'Man of Steel' falls into the same trap. While it bothered me for the unnecessary Spider-Man reboot, it bothered me even more here. Superman is a symbol of hope. A hero that does the right thing no matter what. He embodies truth, justice and the American way. For this movie, the writers were like "Throw all that out, make him moody, and have him steel some clothes while he's at it, because that's something moody Supey does". I just thought there were too many instances in the movie that I couldn't see Superman actually doing. However, with the exception of Kevin Costner as Jonathan Kent, the casting was excellent. The overall story arc was enthralling. And the special effects were mind-blowing.

4. The Conjuring

'The Conjuring' is another one of those "Based on a True Story" horror flicks, and another haunted house story. Actually the couple that this film is about were also involved in the supposedly real events of the 'Amityville Horror' (though they are not mentioned in that film, nor or those events mentioned in this one. That was a separate case). But despite it having so much similarity to things that seem like they've been done 100 times now, this movie was quite anxiety inducing and very tense. And it showed that even Hollywood can take a been-there-done-that story and make it fresh and new again.

3. Maniac

Technically, 'Maniac' is a 2012 movie, but it was not released theatrically in the United States until June of this year. Even it's theatrical release was very limited. But this is a gem of a horror movie. I went in with little expectations, because truth be told, I didn't like the original so I didn't see how this remake would convince me of feeling any different towards it. But surprise! It did. I'm not sure if it was the acting, or the macabre style of the movie, but while the original bored me to tears, this one was enthralling from the moment it started. Who knew Frodo could be so vicious?

2. Evil Dead

The tagline on the poster reads 'The Most Terrifying Film You Will Ever Experience'. Was it worthy of such a bold statement? No. But horror movies aren't really that scary anymore. We've seen it all and that's caused a sort of desensitization to elements that maybe even five years ago would make you have nightmares. The remake/reboot/sequel did make me jump on several occasions though, and it the film overall was just downright brutal. It was creepy, disgusting and while the majority of the cast was either decent or "meh", Jane Levy of 'Suburgatory' fame in the lead role as Mia was perfect. She made you believe she was a druggie struggling with her addiction. And then she made you believe she was possessed by one of the nastiest demons we've seen in film in quite some time.

1. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

'Catching Fire' was one of the last big blockbusters released in the year, and it was so worth the wait. Jennifer Lawrence is proving that she is a force to be reckoned with. With the first installment in 'The Hunger Games' series just coming out last year, one could worry that it's sequel being released the following year was risky. Sure, 'Paranormal Activity' does not take a lot of preparation, but 'Catching Fire' is covered with impressive special effects from beginning to end. While I expected to like this movie very much, considering I really liked the first installment, I was surprised that it ended up being my favorite of the year, but alas, it has.

Most Anticipated of 2014 (in order by release date):

• Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones (01/03)
• Muppets Most Wanted (03/21)
• Captain America: The Winter Soldier (04/04)
• The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (05/02)
• Godzilla (05/16)
• X-Men: Days of Future Past (05/23)
• Malificent (05/30)
• 22 Jump Street (06/13)
• Transformers: Age of Extinction (06/27)
• Guardians of the Galaxy (08/01)
• Sin City: A Dame to Kill For (08/22)
• Paranormal Activity 5 (10/24)
• Big Hero 6 (11/07)
• Dumb and Dumber To (11/14)
• The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part I (11/21)
• The Hobbit: There and Back Again (12/27)

Alan Goes to the Prom with 'Carrie' and Leaves Unscathed

Starring

• Chloe Grace Moretz
• Julianne Moore
• Gabriella Wilde
• Portia Doubleday
• Ansel Elgort

Original Theatrical Release Date: 10/18/2013

Running Time: 99 mins

Synopsis: A reimagining of the classic horror tale about Carrie White (Chloë Grace Moretz), a shy girl outcast by her peers and sheltered by her deeply religious mother (Julianne Moore), who unleashes telekinetic terror on her small town after being pushed too far at her senior prom. Based on the best-selling novel by Stephen King, Carrie is directed by Kimberly Peirce with a screenplay by Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa. --From Rotten Tomatoes

Review: 

Admittedly, I'm not a big reader. I do love Stephen King's books though, particularly his older books. And while 'Carrie', his first published novel, might not be his best written book, it is one of his best and most memorable stories. And Brian DePalma's 1976 film adaptation is easily regarded as a classic horror movie, even if there are some slight deviations from it's source material. 

The new 'Carrie' boasts a reimagining, which I took to be a re-adaptation of the book. With the very talented Chloe Grace Moretz cast in the titular role, and Julianne Moore as her overly religious nutcase of a mother, my expectations were fairly high. Moretz and Moore definitely delivered excellent performances in what I can only describe as a rehash of the original movie. There was nothing in this remake that would make it stand out from the '76 version. In fact, some of the scenes almost seemed like an exact replica, down to the dated dialogue. 

That's not to say that the remake isn't without it's merits. Moretz, while not as memorable in the role as Sissy Spacek, portrays the character with as much awkwardness as one could possibly muster. She really shines in the recreation of the infamous prom scene, where it goes to show that Hell hath no fury like a sheltered telekinetic outcast scorned. And as I mentioned earlier, Julianne Moore was great as well. Those two are not enough to carry a movie though. And had the DePalma version not existed, this would be a fine adaptation of the book. The problem is, the original does exist, and the new version does not deviate enough from it's predecessor  to be necessary.  

Score: 

Alan's Thoughts on 'Django Unchained'

Starring

• Jamie Foxx
• Christoph Waltz
• Samuel L. Jackson
• Leonardo DiCaprio
• Kerry Washington

Original Theatrical Release Date: 12/25/2012

Running Time: 180 mins

Synopsis: Set in the South two years before the Civil War, Django Unchained stars Jamie Foxx as Django, a slave whose brutal history with his former owners lands him face-to-face with German-born bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz). Schultz is on the trail of the murderous Brittle brothers, and only Django can lead him to his bounty. Honing vital hunting skills, Django remains focused on one goal: finding and rescuing Broomhilda (Kerry Washington), the wife he lost to the slave trade. --From Rotten Tomatoes

Review: 

Quentin Tarantino is definitely one of those directors to split the masses. In most cases, he's either a director you love or a director you loathe. I fall in the former of the two. With the eight movies he has directed, I have loved all of them. 'Django' is his longest film, but it certainly does not disappoint.

The gist of the film falls into familiar Tarantino territory. He's definitely a director that has a knack for revenge stories. What's refreshing is that, though there is the common theme of people getting what's coming to them, all of the films are not reminiscent of the others. An angry, left-for-dead mother. A Jewish girl avenging her family. A slave reclaiming his lost love. So without giving away details, I really enjoyed the story.

Tarantino has an eye for one other thing. A flawless cast. Jamie Foxx is the titular Django, a slave purchased by bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz, played by Christoph Waltz. Schultz has purchased Django's freedom because he needs his help identifying his next target. Foxx nails it, but admittedly, I was even a bigger fan of Waltz's performance. It could be the biggest blood-bath, but his little quips and non-chalant actions were impossible not to laugh at. 

If you're squeamish or are turned off by offensive language (the n-word is used more than a Lil' Wayne album), then it may be a movie you would want to stay away from. There are tons of blood and gore throughout. But if you're someone who doesn't mind those things in order to see the bigger picture, then 'Django Unchained' is a movie you won't want to miss. 

Score: 

Alan Reviews 'Evil Dead'

Starring

• Jane Levy
• Shiloh Fernandez
• Lou Taylor Pucci
• Elizabeth Blackmore

Original Theatrical Release Date: 04/05/2013

Running Time: 91 mins

Synopsis: In the much anticipated remake of the 1981 cult-hit horror film, five twenty-something friends become holed up in a remote cabin. When they discover a Book of the Dead, they unwittingly summon up dormant demons living in the nearby woods, which possess the youngsters in succession until only one is left intact to fight for survival. --From Rotten Tomatoes

Review: 

Horror movies are always harder to critique, because in the grand scheme of film-making, they are generally considered the red-headed stepchild. With few exceptions, like 'The Exorcist' or 'Let Me In', horror is usually a genre that is picked apart by the critics for the clichés that compose them. 

And that's why I don't put too much faith into critics. I love movies. All kinds. But I have a soft spot for horror. 'The Evil Dead', as campy as it was, is a classic and a favorite amongst most horror enthusiasts. It isn't really scary, but especially considering it's time, it had it's moments where it was creepy. 

The new 'Evil Dead' remake/sequel/re-imagining definitely lives up to it's predecessor's name. While it trades in most of the humor elements of the original for more disturbing imagery, it works, because believe it or not, it is actually disturbing. 

First off, the cast is headlined by Jane Levy, known for her fairly innocent role on ABC's sitcom 'Suburgatory'. And if you love her on the show, which I do, prepare yourself for the complete opposite of her comedic character. In 'Evil Dead', she is vile, demented, disgusting and was perfect at it. The other characters in the movie are more general run-of-the-mill horror flick death-bait, and all easily in the shadow of Levy, but despite that, none were annoying or felt out of place either. 

The story is similar to the original, with a few minuscule changes. Jane Levy's character, Mia, is at the cabin with her friends who are there to support her in her attempt to stop using drugs. That part is different. Once the infamous Necronomicon is brought into the picture, the story line treads more on familiar ground, while still displaying it differently enough to not be a boring rehash. 

If you hate the horror genre, 'Evil Dead' will do nothing to change your opinion. If you've been waiting for a horror movie to come along that actually keeps you tense, then you will not be disappointed. The movie is rated R, and it rides that rating hard. Yes, there are lots of "gross" shock value moments, not unlike the original back when it was released. But it isn't done in the same vain as, say, 'Saw', where the movie RELIES on the shock factor to entertain you. Despite the gallons of bloods, pounds of body limbs, and puddles of vomit, this movie would have still been entertaining had all of that been reduced by half. That's not saying that it was too excessive. 'Evil Dead' just happened to have enough plot and creep factor to carry itself anyway. 

Score: