Hitchcock

Hitchcock (2013)

Predicted Rating: 4 Stars

Directed by: Sacha Gervasi (Anvil! The Story of Anvil). Starring: Anthony Hopkins (Silence of the Lambs), Helen Mirren (The Queen), Scarlett Johansson (The Avengers) and Jessica Biel (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre).

Hitchcock studies the relationship between Alfred Hitchcock (Hopkins) and his wife, Alma Reville (Mirren), during the filming of his most successful, and controversial film, Psycho.

Now being the time of year, the subject matter, and it's cast I'd assume that Hitchcock is a blatant Oscar grab. I held that opinion till about 5 minutes ago when I read the Oscar nominations and realised it didn't receive one nomination, not one! Well that has just blown the first part of my review out of the water. I was going to analyse the performance of the actors and director to underlay my opinion that the Oscars are a farce and how the Oscars these days are never the best movies of the year because the people who select them have the memories of goldfish. Well can I criticize/praise the actors' performances anyway? Yeah why not.

I think the performance of Hopkins at Hitch was quite good. He did an admirable impersonation. At the start I thought, well he is trying too hard and he is playing stereotypical Hitch. More I think about it however, that is what he was really like, and Hopkins nailed it. I do think his performance is worthy of an Oscar nomination, he probably doesn't deserve to win, but the academy should have given him some kind of nod. Now, I don't like Helen Mirren at all, even on the best of days, so she is going to have to do something very special here to change my opinion of her. Unfortunately, she did not. I mean she was solid, but as not holding a high opinion of her to start with, I went in expecting not to like her performance. This means, on more than one occassion, she pissed me off. Finally, there is Scarlett Johansson playing the blonde bombshell Janet Leigh. Now I enjoy her talents as any other man, but in this film she is just plain boring. All she does is follow Hitch around and agree to his every word like she is a little puppy. Leigh might have been like this in real life, but at least add a bit of spice to the role. I did also like the performance of James D'Arcy as Anthony Perkins but, just like this sentence, he is not utilized to his full potential. 

Since it tells the story of one of the most suspenseful, and quite frankly, one of the best films ever made, does this biopic properly encapsulate the epicness of the original. In one word no. Hitchcock, at times, seems to be dull and boring. I don't know, maybe as it was about the making of a horror film, I subconsciously wanted to watch a horror movie. However, I was stuck with a drama film, and to tell you the truth, I am generally not a fan of drama films. As a result, I sat through most of the film thinking I would much rather be watching Psycho right now.

Alright lets talk shower scene. Since it is one of the best scenes, wait change that, the best scene of all time is involved here, it should be the focus of this film. And it is, but does it do the original justice? Well... it does! Horray! Everybody wins! Just like in the original, it really is the highlight of the film. Yes, there is Scarlett with no clothes on, but the real stand-out from Hitchcock, is the performance of Anthony Hopkins during the scene. Here you get to see and feel the raw emotion of Hopkins whilst keeping his flawless impersonation of the great man. Even with the great performance from Hopkins, you still feel like it is still all about the scene, rather than Hitch, because it is built up for such a long time. My criticism is that they should of played the original scene at the end of the movie, over the credits. I mean a scene that scared people out of doing a basic human need for a long time should deserve a significant amount of credit.

It also got me thinking, there are three well known films that are inspired by the murders of serial killer Ed Gein. And I mean these aren't just any three films, these are three of the best movies ever made. They, of course, are Psycho, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and The Silence of the Lambs. There probably aren't too many people, especially outside the US, who would bat an eyelid if you mentioned the name Ed Gein, but a lot of people would have seen, or at least heard of, those three movies. This is probably a good thing, as it is never a good thing to popularize people based on such heinous crimes.

Overall: A reasonable film depicting one of the great directors, however, I couldn't help thinking I'd much prefer to be watching Psycho right now. 2.5 Stars

Next Time: Gangster Squad, yay Emma Stone!




 

2013 Preview

2013 Preview

Here are the 10 movies I am most looking forward to seeing in the upcoming year. In an attempt to create some expense, I will start from 10 and work my way down.

10. The Lone Ranger (4th July)
An adaption of the 1960's western TV series starring Johnny Depp as Tonto. Hi-yo Silver away!

9. World War Z (20th June)
A post apocalyptic zombie thriller that mixes elements of Dawn of the Dead and The Jason Bourne series starring Brad Pit

8. Paranorman (10th Jan)
Cool looking animation that gathered a lot of media with it being too scary for kids and almost given an R rating 

7. Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters (7th Feb)
Just looks like an awesome concept

6. Pacific Rim (11th July)
A Guillermo del Toro directed film based on big monsters fighting bigger monsters

5. Oz: The Great and Powerful (7th March)
A prequel to the Wizard of Oz directed by Sam Raimi (The Evil Dead series) and starring Rachael Weiz, Mila Kunis and Michelle Williams as the three witches.

4. The Evil Dead (2nd May)
A remake of the first installment of one of the greatest horror series of all time. The trailer looks full on, not for the faint hearted

3. Django Unchained (24th Jan)
Fullfills Tarantino's dream of making a Spaghetti Western. Starring Jamie Foxx and Leonardo DiCaprio.

2. Star Trek Into Darkness (16th May)
Its a Star Trek movie, do I need to say more

1.  Carrie (14th November)
A remake of the 1976 adaption of the Stephen King classic. Perfectly classed with Chloe Grace Moretz playing Carrie and Julianne Moore as her crazy mother.

Wreck-It Ralph

Wreck-It Ralph (2012)

Predicted Rating: 2.5 Stars

Directed by: Rich Moore (The Simpsons). With the voicing talent of: John C. Reilly (Step Brothers), Sarah Silverman (The Sarah Silveman Program), Jack McBrayer (30 Rock) and Jane Lynch (Role Models)

After 30 years of playing the bad guy, Wreck-It Ralph (Reilly) is sick of playing second fiddle to the titular character and hero, Fix-It Felix Jr. (McBrayer). To gain the respect of the occupants of the building he constantly destroys, Ralph starts his search for a medal from another game. He finds himself in Hero's Duty, a Halo style first person shooter, where the player fights a swarm of enemy bugs (ala Starship Troopers) to win a medal. Ralph finds the medal but proceeds to crash the escape pod, along with one of the bugs, into the karting game Sugar Rush. Here he runs into Vanellope von Schweetz (Silverman), a glitch in the game who's goal is to win the race that decides the characters for the game the next day. Vanellope enlists the help of Ralph to build her kart and prove to King Candy that she is not just a glitch in the game, but a legitimate racer. Felix and the squad leader in Hero's Duty, Calhoun (Lynch), find that a bug has escaped into Sugar Rush and has the potential to destroy not just that game but the entire arcade and must destroy the bug and rescue Ralph.

Oooooh a kids movie. It has been a very long time since I have watched a new kid's movie at the cinema. I mean I have undertaken some nostalgia lately by watching Home Alone and The Labyrinth but I think the last new kid's movie I saw was Monsters vs. Aliens, which I believe is the culprit for bringing back the 3D craze. Kid's movies have changed a lot since my glory days of the early nineties. Since Toy Story and Shrek, these movies have massive budgets (Tangled is the second most expensive movie ever made at $260 million, with this movie at number 45 at $165 million), and a big name voice cast. They also have to be both entertaining for the kids as well as the adults that take them along. As a result I will conduct this review in two parts, one as if I was a kid watching, and the other part as the adult. I will start as the kid...

Wow, look at all the pretty colours. The animation style in this movie is fairly unique, and downright awesome. There is a vast abundance of vibrant colours, which will mezmorise the kids. Obviously you aren't going to walk out of the cinema, ask your kid "what did you like the most" and they say "Well Geeves, the clever use of the colour scheme was something that appealed to me vastly." However it will keep them occupied for a significant period of time without them knowing. There were also some cool animation techniques, such as the glitch and mixing up the styles depending on what game you were in. 

Oh no she said a naughty word. Now the character that appeals most to the kids is Vanellope von Schweetz, mainly due to her potty mouth. Now as an adult, this is fairly annoying at the start, but the kids will love it with words the consider risque like doddie and stinkbrain. But, I may be completely wrong as when I was 8 I would find this hilarious, but kids these days are a lot different. I was going to make the joke to show the kids Silverman's most famous work, I'm Fucking Matt Damon, but they have probably already seen it. Anyway, she plays the role of the down and out kid that rises to triumph at them end. Oh no spoiler alert, wait no, there is a character like that in every kids movie.

Now to review it as an adult. I thoroughly enjoyed this film, mainly due to the nostalgia factor. There was the introduction of a few characters where I went yes! Like having Bowser and Diablo at the bad guy convention, as well as having the ghost from Pac-Man as their leader. Mainly it appealed to the nerd gamer inside me. However, the aim of these movies is to entertain the parents that take their kids along. I am not sure whether Wreck-It Ralph fails at this because gamer nerds and fathers of children don't really go hand in hand. However there are a vast abundance of jokes (mainly puns) that will keep the adults entertained.

Like I do most of the time, I went and watched this movie by myself. Before anyone pikes up and says that I am weird for doing so, I have a theory. You sit in a dark room where you are not allowed to talk so why would you bother going to a movie with anyone else. Anyway, being a kids movie, there were a shit load of kids there. As a result I felt fairly awkward sitting there by my lonesome. I was trying to make my presence as inconspicuous as possible, something that was blown almost immediately when I woman proceeded to knock over my frozen coke and make a huge scene of it. My presence was also made obvious several times when I laughed at several jokes that no-one else got, such as comparing Fix-It Felix Jr. to contractors and Skrillex as the DJ at their party.

Also as a result of there being heaps of kids there and their extremely short attention spans, they began to get extremely restless after about an hour. I am not saying my cinematic experience was ruined as extensively as the Paranormal Activity movies, but I would have felt a lot more comfortable watching it from home. There was also something cool I saw walking in, they provided booster seats for the younger kids so they could see. I am thinking I could steal one next time, and being 6 foot 2, piss off who is ever sitting behind me.

In summary, Wreck-It Ralph is a great movie for both adults and kids. There is a solid story without it being too outrageous that you become confused. It is also perfectly casted with the stars chosen because they are suited for the roles as opposed to being there to have their name on the credits. All I can say is I am looking forward to watching this again when it comes out on DVD.

Overall: A thoroughly entertaining movie for all ages, 4.5 Stars

Next Time: Off to watch Hitchcock tonight in my "I am shunning Life of Pi evening"


How do you like them apples?

2012 In Review

Every Movie, Every Rating

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey:  Not a good as it should have been and just a money maker. 3.5 Stars

Red Dawn: Pitiful excuse for an action film, gets its stars purely based on Chris Hemsworth's manliness. 1.5 Stars

Skyfall: Typical Bond film. 3.5 Stars

Dredd: Surprisingly good and simply badass. I am the law! 3.5 Stars

Paranormal Activity 4: I love these movies too much to give it any other rating. 5 stars

Bait: Terrible, terrible film. 0.5 Stars

The Watch: An all star cast couldn't make the weak plot shine. 1.5 Stars

The Expendables 2: 102 minutes of testosterone. 3.5 Stars

Total Recall: No where near as good as the original but still gives it a red hot crack. 3.5 stars

Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter: Poor attempt at what could have been a really exciting film with an original concept. 2 stars

The Amazing Spiderman: Haven't I seen this recently somewhere before? 3 Stars

The Dark Knight Rises: A perfect ending to the fantastic Christopher Nolan Trilogy looking at the dark side of the legend. Top 100 Movies of All Time

Ted: Just like a good episode of Family Guy, inappropriately awesome. 4 Stars

Snow White and the Huntsman: How does Kristen Stewart have a career in acting? 2 Stars

Rock of Ages: Awesome soundtrack, weak story. 2.5 Stars

Prometheus: Not many people liked this film but I loved it! 5 Stars

The Dictator: Better than Bruno, but light years away from Borat. 2.5 Stars

Men in Black 3: Solid effort, better than the second but not as good as the first. 3 Stars

The Avengers: Box office winner for the year, appeals to everyone. I thought it lacked one or two things so I couldn't give it a perfect rating but it was close. 4.75 stars

Battleship: Surprisingly good mainly because Rhianna keeps her mouth shut and the sound is awesome, needs to be watched on a massive screen with awesome surround sound. 4 Stars

Chronicle: Tries to squeeze the last little bit of life out of the found footage genre. 2.5 Stars

Mission Impossible 4: Tom Cruise taking a beating for 2 hours so if you like that kind of thing... 3 Stars

The Hunger Games: Way better than I expected due to it's target audience but I am still unsure whether I am cool with kids killing each other for entertainment. 4 Stars

Girl with the Dragon Tattoo: Great take on the now infamous millennium trilogy with a distinctly Se7en feel. Performance of a lifetime by Rooney Mara. 4.5 Stars

21 Jump Street: Massive surprise. Jonah Hill is at his hilarious best and who thought Channing Tatum could be funny. 4 Stars

John Carter: Box Office Bomb of the year and deservedly so. Just like the date I was on at the time of viewing, dull and boring. 1.5 Stars

Underworld: Awakening: Underworld movies are never good, but hey Kate Beckinsale in leather. 2 Stars

The Devil Inside: One of the worst movies I have ever seen. Exemplified by the fact there was only two of us in the cinema and the old lady sitting infront of me after the movie turned around and said worst ending ever. 0 Stars

Iron Sky: As with Lincoln, fantastic concept but not well executed. 1.5 Stars

Piranha 3DD: Tries to be one of those movies that are so bad they are good but fails miserably. 0.5 Stars

Cabin in the Woods: Unique take on the traditional horror movie format. 4 Stars

Awards
Now, lets dish out some awards. There are you standard ones but I will see if I can come up with some unique ones

Best Movie: The Dark Knight Rises
Worst Movie: The Devil Inside
Best Male Performance: Mark Whalberg and Seth MacFarlane in Ted
Worst Male Performance: The Hoff in Piranha 3DD
Best Female Performance: Rooney Mara in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Worst Female Performance: Kristen Stewart in Snow White and the Huntsman
Best Director: Joss Wheedon for The Avengers
Surprise: 21 Jump Street
Disappointment: The Watch
OMG Marry Me Now: Emma Stone in The Amazing Spiderman
This is Fucking Awesome: The anticipation for the Merman in Cabin in the Woods  
And Now Make-Out: Kate Beckinsale and Jessica Biel in Total Recall
Brown Pants Time: The ending to Paranormal Activity 4
Oh He is Actually Funny: Channing Tatem in 21 Jump Street
I'd Consider Switching Teams: Chris Hemsworth in Cabin in the Woods, The Avengers and Red Dawn  
   

Jack Reacher

Jack Reacher (2013)

Predicted Rating: 3 Stars

Directed by: Christopher McQuarrie (The Usual Suspects, Valkyrie). Starring: Tom Cruise (Top Gun, Mission: Impossible), Rosamund Pike (Wrath of the Titans) and Robert Duvall (The Godfather, Apocalypse Now).

The film kicks off with a lone sniper gunning down 5 seemingly innocent, unrelated people in broad daylight.Whilst allegedly in protective custody, the accused shooter, James Barr, is brutally bashed into a coma, however beforehand he asks for one thing, Jack Reacher (Cruise). Reacher is an ex army officer who has been drifting around the country essentially unsighted for years. Upon his arrival, the defense lawyer of Barr, Helen Rodan, enlists the help of Reacher to help her acquit her client.

This movie seemed really confused. Not sexually, but with it's feel, what it was all about. It was violent, but not really that violent, funny but not really that funny. The violence factor is a defining moment for the movie. There are a lot of people drawing comparisons with the sniper scene to the recent tragedy at Sandy Hook, something that is hurting the credibility of the production. That scene is really not that violent and I have seen much more up front similar scenes. Another scene that reiterated the violence shambles was a scene where, to show his dedication to his life, the fallen gangster had to chew his own fingers off, just as the main villain had done in the past, or be killed. Now in my personal opinion, the impact of the scene would have been far greater if he did chew off his fingers, and then get shot anyway. Instead he just gets shot. With the humour, the writer threw in a few funny jokes but they seemed to be hidden and skipped over. I will use an analogy I experienced recently to emphasize my point. I was giving a presentation at work where I threw a few jokes in. Halfway through I realised the mood of the audience was not as free wheeling as I anticipated. As a result I skipped over a joke. At the end of the presentation, one of the audience members asked me why I decided to exclude the joke because he thought it was quite funny and appropriate. So I learned a valuable lesson that day, the same which can be applied for this movie, if you have a good joke, make sure you accentuate it.

Despite it's fast paced, forever changing plot, the thing that confused me the most was the status of some of the characters. I am not sure if it was the performance of Cruise, who was quite good I thought, but Reacher just seemed too Bond like. He was trying to be too suave but not really pulling it off. Everything he did seemed to be perfect, even down to his attackers completely missing him with crowbars and baseball bats on numerous occasions. Then there was the lawyer. She seemed to normal, and quite frankly boring. She needed to be the stereotypical character, with Reacher being unique, in order to distinguish this film from series like Bond and Bourne. Either have her as the ditsy damsel in distress that needs to be rescued all of the time, or the head strong mature girl that fixes all of Reacher's mistakes. Unfortunately she was a bit of both and a bit of neither. Finally, and most importantly, she needed to fall head over heals in love with Reacher. There are inklings of this occurring but in the end she forgets all about this and he goes on his merry ways whilst she is left to clean up the mess

Speaking of the plot, it was fairly solid. There was a good starting point, plenty of twists of turns and an ending that leaves you wanting more. One criticism was that every thing seemed to perfect. There was not one mistake made my anyone, and as Homer once quoted when he was made aware of the whereabouts of a once missing Maude Flanders "Well everything is wrapped up in a neat little package." One thing I really liked was the car chase. Not because it was unbelievably epic, but the cars handled like they would handle in real life. The Audi, driven by the enemy, moved around the corners with relative ease, whilst the Camaro, driven by Reacher, handled like an American muscle cars, powersliding around every corner and seemingly moments from spinning out. 

I am not sure if it was on purpose, or anyone else noticed, but I saw something that was a massive gaff on the part of the editors. District Attorney Alex Rodan (Richard Jenkins) was discussing the case with his daughter, Helen Rodan. Half way through a sentence, you hear a car drive by in the background. Jenkins pauses, seems to lose his place, then resume with the conversation. Now, here you would expect this to be a plot device with the car coming into play and say, attempting to gun down either of the characters. However nothing. What the hell. If I picked this up, surely you would have at the time and yelled cut and restart the scene. If not it would have been picked up in the editing room and cut out. Who knows, maybe the car was part of the scene but it was cut for one reason or another. Look out for it if you watch it and let me know if you saw the same to make sure I am not going crazy.

The big question is, as there is an extensive series of books, will there be an extensive film series. The short answer is no, the long answer is I doubt we will even see one sequel. I was predicting this movie to be the first box office flop of the year, with comparisons drawn to Sandy Hook and other big draw cards such as Les Mis and The Hobbit, people might be reluctant to see it. However I have just looked it up and it seems to have made it's money back, just though. Still, this is a decent film but I would probably wait to see it on DVD, it would make a good I can't be bothered doing anything else Saturday night movie

Overall Rating: Confused not confusing 3 Stars

Next Time; Ah the choices. Three fantastic movies out Thursday, Paranorman, Hitchcock and Gangster Squad. I also haven't seen Les Mis or Wreck it Ralph either so it all depends what mood I am in.


By the way, a perfect candidate for Rule 34 called Jack Reaches Around

    

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)

Predicted rating: 4 stars

Directed by Peter Jackson (Braindead, Bad Taste). Staring Martin Freeman (The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy), Sir Ian McKellen (X- Men) and Hugo Weaving (The Matrix, Captain America).

The first installment in a new trilogy is the prequel to the highly successful Lord of the Rings trilogy. The once mighty dwarven city of Erebor is destroyed by a dragon named Smaug, forcing the dwarves to flee. The film tells the story of Thorin, his band of dwarves, Bilbo Baggins and Gandalf in their quest to reclaim the city and return the pride back to the dwarven race.

*sniff *sniff, what's that smell. Oh, it's money, something Peter Jackson will be smelling a lot of when he is strolling all the way to the bank. Essentially all this film is, is a money grab. I am not saying that a Hobbit movie shouldn't have been made, it is a good idea. However I am going to put an emphasis on the A, A Hobbit movie, not three. It is highly likely, with the current cinematic environment, that these movies will go into make a billion plus dollars each. Peter Jackson knows this and all he is aiming to do is make three low risk films that will everyone will go see. Playing it safe means Jackson makes the money. If he tries to hard to make a good film and it backfires and it turns out to be terrible, he will be in the shits, something that has happened before (*cough John Carter *cough). Although, as with all theories, it has an exception, i.e. Transformers, terrible movies but made a truck load of money. Mmmm nostalgia effect.

I am going to use an American analogy here because it is easier, the older brother (The Lord of the Rings) is the quarterback of the football team and the school captain. He is the king of the school, all the girls want him and all the guys want to be him. It is now the first day of the year, his younger brother (The Hobbit) rocks up expecting to ride on his brother's successes. He is clearly the inferior sibling but some fall for this ploy, others are smarter and know what's going on. It is pretty clear that The Hobbit is riding on the successes of The Lord of the Rings. Something I think is going to work here because lots of people will go and see it. 

The pacing of this movie is less than desirable. It is not awful but it is no Wrath of Khan. That's to be expected when you try to make three movies from a 300 page kids book. Well one of these movies is from the appendices. Wait, appendices. That is like me publishing a scientific paper and trying to make as much money off a few tables of data and a photo of me next to the equipment with my thumbs up. Anyway, the pacing just seems way to deliberate. There is a lot of padding going on to ensure that it ends on a climax, i.e. having them sit around for 45 minutes at the start discussing their plans. this is to be expected however when you split an original story into two, something that has happened a lot lately, as in the final chapters of Harry Potter and Twilight. Harry Potter did it ok but, not that I have seen it, I heard Twilight stunk it up big time with part 2 featuring a 45 minute montage of every character that has appeared in the series. One montage even intertwines a character that has been played by two different actors. There is a reasonable climax at the end, I am just going to harp on this point, it should have been one movie!

Whilst there are some elements of the next installment I am looking forward to like Benedict Cumberbatch as Smaug/The Necromancer, I am not really hanging out to see it. I don't think it will even make my list of top 10 movies I am looking forward to next year (keep your eyes peeled). I will still see it, I just won't be having any sleepless nights over it. By the way, old Benny is going to be a hated man in the nerd community playing both Smaug and the villain in the new Star Trek movie (yes one review, two Star Trek references, winning!).

I have had a read through my review and it all seems pretty scathing. I think I have been a bit harsh because it is a reasonably good film. I am just frustrated due to the money grab factor. There are some good elements, like it is visually stunning and it is a solid story. The money grab factor was really consolidated when there were 30 minutes of adverts before it started!

Overall: I am not saying a film that I have given four stars, like say 21 Jump Street, is a better movie than The Hobbit, it is just not as good as it could be. 21 Jump Street got a good rating because I was expecting it to be bad and it was awesome, I was expecting the Hobbit to be much better. 3.5 stars

Next time: So many films to chose from, Les Miserables, Wreck it Ralph, Jack Reacher. It all depends when I get back to the movies.

Red Dawn

Red Dawn (2012)

Predicted Rating: 2.5 Stars

Directed by: Dan Bradley (Directorial Debut). Starring: Chris Hemsworth (Thor, The Avengers), Josh Hutcherson (The Hunger Games) and Adrianne Palicki (Supernatural).

A remake of the 1984 film of the same name starring Patrick Swayze and Charlie Sheen, Red Dawn follows Jed Eckhart (Hemsworth), who has recently returned home from a stint in the military. Upon his return, his home town of Spokane, Washington, is invaded by North Korea, as well as the majority of the US. Jed, along with his brother Matt (Josh Peck) and a group of friends escape to the surrounding hills. Here they form a terrorist group known as the Wolverines (named after Matt's football team) and fight to stop the North Korean invasion. Matt is torn between helping the Wolverines fight for justice and rescuing his girlfriend Erica (Isabel Lucas), who has been captured by the North Koreans

I went into this movie in a reasonably bad mood so before I sat down I expected to give this movie a bad review. My rational side at the time thought this may be a tad biased. Upon further reflection after the viewing, the negative review is fully justified! This movie is plain terrible. This is something I did expect but my plan for the evening was to sit in a darkened room with my popcorn and frozen coke and watch things blow up. This was really the only good part of the original. Up until Kill Bill rocked up, it was considered the most violent movie ever made based on the VAPM (Violent Acts per Minute) scale. This movie did not live up to any expectations. As a result of my dissatisfaction for this movie, and my inability to say anything positive, I will list all of my rants below in dot form.

• The camera work is absolutely awful, nauseating in most circumstances. I know having shaky cameras is supposed to represent chaos, something prominent in this film, but this just takes it to a whole new level. The car scene at the beginning is the prime example. I have seen a few car chases where the camera is supposed to be in the car but they have been watchable. The one in this movie is just plain sickening. I am glad I watched it on a small screen and not at the Titan XC or I might have needed a sick bag
• This is supposed to be a patriotic American film, did they not realise that two of the main actors are Australian! Hemsworth tries to do his best to sound American and does a pretty good job. Isabel Lucas is given as few lines as possible to hide her Paul Hogan style accent. I'd say she would say 10 words tops, so as a main character she might as well be a mute.
• Maybe this is a credit to Hemsworth pure manliness but Adrianne Palicki's love for him is almost unnatural. They are supposed to be the developing love interest of the story after exchanging looks at the start. However, it is not until about 75 minutes in the film that they share a word. After maybe 2 minutes of interaction, they go to make out but are rudely interrupted. I was thinking about not telling you the next part because it ruins the ending, but I advise not watching this film, so in the spirit of a good review I will ruin everything. Despite the sheer lack of anything between the two characters, Palicki is left utterly devastated, almost catatonic, when Hemsworth is killed, and I don't mean for a 5 minute period, for days and weeks after the event. All they did was almost make out, they weren't married for 30 years or anything.
• Josh Peck looks and sounds stoned all the time and it gets super annoying. That is all.
• I know he is supposed to be the developmental character who goes from wuss to super soldier, but come on Josh Hutcherson, you won the Hunger Games, you shouldn't be vomiting when you see a dead body. 
• I am sick and tired of seeing over aged actors playing high school students. Most of them are 26 or older and some don't even look remotely like they belong in a school, I am looking your way Adrianne. Also why does Matt have to be the quaterback of his school team. The characters of these movies are always quaterbacks. At least intertwine it in the film, like make him make some ridiculous grenade throw. Give another position a chance. When have you watched a movie when the tight end or free safety has been the hero.
• When are people going to learn to leave their emotions at home when fighting in a post-apocalyptic style battle. Most of the characters are killed because their, or someone else's emotions get in the way. Matt is fully responsible for a few deaths whilst trying to rescue his girlfriend. Then the majority of other deaths are caused by petty bickering. Connor Cruise (yes Tom and Nicole's son) comes the closest after offering to cut a tracking device out of himself. He convinced otherwise by the team and then boldly stays behind to fight. That's the way son!
• Sigh another remake. I will say it again and again, remakes can be good but in moderation. Also is this the right time for this movie, probably not.

So that's enough of my rant. Oh wait wait, I remembered something I liked. They do the scene when they get someone to be bait, who runs over to the rest of the wolverines who are hiding in holes. Once the enemy arrives they jump out and shoot everyone. Trust me, it is much more exciting to watch than trying to read my explanation.

Overall Rating: Fairly poor attempt to make an action film, could have been a whole lot better. 1.5 stars

Next Time: Torn between Les Miserables, The Hobbit and Wreck-It Ralph on Boxing day. A triple header sounds good but contrary to popular belief, I actually have a life so we will see how we go.