Movies seen in 2012

Moneyball
Sometimes a good reason to have friends is that they can recommend movies to you that you would never pick up on your own accord.  Thanks to the urging of some friends, we were able to enjoy "Moneyball."
While this film is another that surpasses my expectations, it is not without its flaws. One of which is the length. It's the story of how a disgruntled and discouraged Brad Pitt, manager of a baseball team that always loses, sets out to change the system of how players are recruited, along with a nebbish Jonah Hill who comes up with the system based on stats and maths and other things I care less about.  And despite all the pooh-poohing coming from the old fogies who run the team, Brad Pitt does whatever it takes to make sure his system works, and once the obstacles are removed, it does. And yet, it's a bittersweet ending in the fact that despite his losses, Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill did the unthinkable and changed the game.
Overall, it's not bad. Not spectacular, but it's an interesting viewpoint that most of the common sports spectators don't normally see.

Cowboys and Aliens
Daniel Craig. Harrison Ford. Two names who are associated with some amazing action heroes of the big screen. So when there was news that both of these hardboiled actors were going to be in the same movie set in the Old West, the only word to describe the feeling was "hyped."  However, upon actually seeing "Cowboys and Aliens," the better word to describe the feeling was "underwhelmed."

It's not that these two actors didn't act well. Daniel Craig, as a recently amnesiac outlaw who had left his gang for a woman and who escaped the "devils," was able to convince us of this gruff and tormented persona without too much questioning.  Harrison Ford, who plays a no-nonsense land baron who was a formal colonel who fought Indians in his past, comes across as intimidating and quite mean in his initial appearances but slowly becomes less of a jerk and more human.  The main problem for me is the story and the blandness of the side characters.  The story tells us aliens (from outer space) are abducting humans in the Old West for kicks and giggles with fancy-looking lassos while also stealing all of the gold.
...What?
None of the side characters are relatable.  One was a doctor who nobody respects, a preacher that is almost as good a shot as the main characters, but dies early on, a kid whose grandpa got swiped, and Olivia Wilde, who for some reason the camera focuses on for no apparent reason very frequently, was bland as heck, offers a little mystery, but then dies off in a kamikaze strike against the invaders.
...What?
If the story and supporting cast are unlikable, it doesn't matter how good the main characters are played.  So many times I was yelling at the screen "What? Why?" because of the incomprehensibility and illogical nature of the script, the blandness of the side characters, and the utmost stupidity of the enemies. You'd think aliens that have spanned the galaxy in search of gold of all things would account for the resistance of the locals...BUT NO! They are taken down by arrows, guns, and one little kid who stabbed one in the weak spot for massive damage!

Overall, this movie has problems but it has semi-interesting visuals, and cool (theoretically) main characters.

So basically, the aliens are a combination of this guy's mentality:

mixed with the monster from "Cloverfield"

Real Steel
Rock'em Sock'em Robots. Classic game that's survived the nostalgia filtering through its simple premise of beating up the the other dude by punching really hard.
Rocky. Movie of one of the greatest underdogs in cinematic history, also synonymous with the very word "boxing."
What happens when you combine the two concepts?
"Real Steel."
 Of course it goes beyond the simple pleasure of seeing big ol' robots beating the crap out of each other, as it's also a story about family, particularly the relationship between a father and son and how both of their skills are needed to make their underdog bot be the best of the best. Hugh Jackman is likable as the washed-up boxer, as he's gruff but learns to open up more. The bratty half-pint that's supposed to be his kid is strange in that he seems to be more like an adult than an actual kid (well, there is that one scene where he downs almost a whole 12-pack of Dr. Pepper...I can relate.) I also like the intrigue that their little underdog bot has in that it could be sentient or it could be just imitating real people, which kind of makes it like a parrot.
Overall, it's a blast to watch not just because of CGI metal monstrosities beating the crap out of each other (which, funnily enough, some are only half CGI since puppetry was involved here), but also for the good 'ol fashioned tale of the sports hotshot learning that there's more to life than the glory.

Our protagonist robot is essentially this thing:

only with the heart and Japanese name of this bot:

For a more entertaining (spoiler-filled) review, go here

Kamen Rider Movie Taisen: Megamax
Kamen Rider Fourze & Kamen Rider OOOs Movie Wars: Megamax, while being the yearly crossover movie for the Kamen Rider series, has a lot of good intention and feeling to it. The OOOs part of the story is great because it picks up where the last episode left off, gave us all our favorite characters back, and established cool (concept-wise at least) movie-only Riders (hero AND a villain. Not too often you get both). The Fourze part of the story really takes the cake though since the it shows us the normally bombastic main character of Gentaro being sheepsih around a girlfriend that literally fell out of the sky and into his arms. But then all is not well as it turns out she's a McGuffin for the evil corporation that's been lurking in the shadows since Kamen Rider W (oh and both the main characters from that show come back and to reprise their roles in more than just throwaway cameos.) Then when all three heroes are on screen, nothing but awesomeness ensues as almost every power they have is showcased in fighting off either nameless mooks or weaker but familiar boss characters. I'll admit, the movie-only super forms they receive *are* ridiculous, but the movie is exactly the right kind of fanservice that fans of both shows (and the fans of W) have been waiting for. =D

Mild SPOILER but Gentaro's girlfriend ended up being something like this:

http://www.rpgamer.com/games/arcadia/soa/fanart/fina_celyne.jpg

The Avengers
What can be said about the Avengers other than SUPERHERO-Y GOODNESS!!!!! All the other Marvel movies have been building up to this and the payoff is glorious. The scene of all 6 heroes assembled while the camera pans around then is worth its weight in gold. But yeah, the plot is...basic. The main baddy from the Thor movie takes the McGuffin from the Captain America Movie to take over the world while a different Incredible Hulk rampages like Godzilla (New Hulk is pretty good since he plays a more fidgety/barely-holding-it-together Bruce Banner than Ed Norton and Eric Bana before him.) and Robert Downey Jr. is his usual cocksure, but lovable self.
But the true meat of this movie is the interactions between all the big name characters. All that ego, all that do-goodery/cocky selflishness combo, it leads to some interesting dialogue and situations.
Overall, great action flick with witty lines and great visuals

Sorry Alan Silvestri, your theme is good, but THIS theme song ROCKS!

For a more entertaining (spoiler-filled) review, go here.

Brave
After Pixar's lack of truly original concepts in the past two years (sequels, sequels everywhere) I was kind of hyped for this new story about a redhead lass shooting arrows at bears...turns out that's not what the film was about at all. It was more about the rebellious teenage daughter who doesn't want to be a princess but tries not to disappoint her family...so much for originality. *shrugs* But through a quirk of fate, her mother gets turned into a beast and a different kind of true love will break the curse...so yay originality.
What I did like was the great feel of Scottish culture and some of the humor involving the mute triplets, who were very reminiscent of the triplets from Scrooge McDuck stories in their brand of mischief. Also the mother-daughter relationship is the main focus and I like their tale of dynamic reconciliation. What seems to be lacking though for me is that it didn't seem fantastic enough. There are one or two elements of the truly strange and magical, but for the most part, the environment is too set in its medieval times setting, with not enough of the Pixar trademark blend of mundane & barely-normal-fantasy. Still worth a watch in my opinion, but it ranks pretty low on my list of top Pixar films...definitely way up from the "Cars" series though.

Archers...much more popular in fiction than you think.

For a more in-depth review (and slightly biased), go here.


The Muppets
What will one fanboy do to make sure his heroes don't go down without a fight?
Play the music.
Light the lights.
Meet the Muppets on the Muppet Show revived for 2011!
Yes, in the newest simply named Muppet movie, "The Muppets," one fanboy who is supposedly brothers with Jason Segal (ummm either adopted or genetics in this world is way more messed up than anything out of Greek Mythology), hears the dastardly plans of an oil tycoon, and becomes the new hope for the old gang of familiar, lovable, JimHenson-made faces. Along with catchy songs, celebrity cameos out the wazoo, and some good, solid humor, this Muppet show revival brought the nostalgia out of the die-hards and made the world's most famous puppets relevant again in the eyes of the young and uninitiated.

For someone else's more in-depth review, go here.
For a more entertaining (spoiler-filled) review, go here.
For a more in-depth review (with a comic!), go here.

Hop
To make a protagonist in any story, one of the keys is that he or she has to be likable. Even if he is a supposedly despicable character with no redeeming qualities, most writers would craft it so that the detestableness of the character is still somewhat enjoyable to watch, playing on people's dark desires of escapism.
That being said, the two protagonists of "Hop" have none of that.
They are thoroughly unlikable. One is a slacker beyond all normal reasoning, with the standard "I want more out of life" mentality that CAN be endearing, but then he does nothing to really achieve this vague dream job.  The CGI bunny, voiced by Russel Brand, wants to pursue his own dreams and break away from the family business...which is being the Easter bunny, and managing candy production and stuff. This would be fine, except that he runs away and then starts scheming people/taking advantage of the goodness of humanity almost the moment he enters the real world.
Another thing that bothers me is the need for live-action. This movie is purportedly done by the same folks who did "Despicable Me," a film which, for the most part, is free of Easter Bunnies, and crazy chicks bent on overthrowing their bosses, and there's no need for filming real actors. The juxtaposition between the two worlds and the interactions between inhabitants of both can be really jarring.
It can be kind of cute at times, but really, it's not worth the time.

Not really a spoiler since they say right at the beginning, but he becomes the Easter Bunny.
...
I don't see how this is any better than the evil, Latino chick that goes One-Winged Angel on us. ^~^

We bought a zoo 
Matt Damon's the hapless widower in this flick who seeks to reconnect the bond between him and his children by doing the most logical thing a parent can do: buy a broken-down zoo and try to restore it to its former glory. The main pull in this movie is the interactions and budding relationships between all the main characters (there are some easily forgettable side characters, but some side characters go well with the main characters), especially between Damon and his son, his daughter, the zookeeper, and the naysayers. Do I recommend it? If you're into this kind of story, but honestly, I thought it was a little bland; decent and watchable, but bland.

The Amazing Spiderman
Yes ladies and gentlemen, Spidey lost the organic web-shooters in this reboot of a franchise, "The Amazing Spiderman." As the last Spiderman movie left a bad taste in the mouths of fans, critics, and general audiences alike, this new Spiderman movie promised to be a breath of fresh air to one of the earliest of Marvel movie franchises.  I will say that it is indeed a breath of fresh air to the characters previously established in other movies; the Peter Parker that Andrew Garfield plays is not AS blatantly nerdy and loser-like as Tobey Maguire did, as it kind of helps that the movie is centered solely on Peter's high school days.  Emma Stone plays Gwen Stacy, and she is surprisingly competent as a leading lady, not falling completely into the role of the damsel in distress like Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane, being brilliant in her own right and fighting her own fights when need be.  The villain actually does hatch a diabolical scheme that doesn't involve general terrorism that the previous villains seemed to have as their default operating system, and is more than a match for our fledgling hero.
I do have to say though, the teen drama scenes seem to take up the abundance of the movie, and thus it seems to fall under the same trap as the "Green Lantern" movie with the focus being more on the relationships being formed than about superhero-y stuff happening. Other than one or two scenes where I got a good laugh out of it, most of the interactions between Garfield and Stone lack chemistry (irony because science!). The infamous scene of Uncle Ben's death was also severely cheapened by the stupidity of the man himself instead of it being Peter's fault, AND we don't actually get the trademark "Great power, great responsibility" line. =/
Overall, this film looks great with its youthful new cast, has great action when it matters, and leaves plenty of room for a continuation of this new series.

Verrrrry clever movie designer...verrrrrrry clever...

For a more entertaining (spoiler-filled) review,  go here.


Puss in Boots
Remember how back in "Shrek 2" they introduced Antonio Bandaras reprising his role of Zorro from "Mask of Zorro" but as a cat and it was the coolest new character ever? Wouldn't it be great if this character could get more coverage on his own story?
Well, we got our wish, but it was from a monkey's paw.
"Puss in Boots" delivers us our lovable, action-seeking hero that embodies not only the awesomeness of the swashbuckler, but also the trademark seamless meshing of his feline nature. Not only that, but we get an actual backstory of Puss. And therein lies some of the problem. They show him as a kid, but keep Antonio Bandaras's voice...ok, that's slightly excusable...cute adorable kitty with suave Spanish accent is comedy gold BUT GOOD HEAVENLY CHEEZUS DAT HUMPTY DUMPTY! I cannot remember another character so bent on derailing the tone of a movie since the robot revolutionaries in the recent "Astro Boy." Just like those clowns, every time Humpty Dumpty, voiced by Zach Galifianakis, opens his mouth, I thoroughly get sucked out of the movie; I cease to be engrossed in the goings on. I get that they were trying to go for the modern, fast-talker to try and add some levity to otherwise archaic situations (hey, it worked with the Genie from "Aladdin"), but this egg annoys me greatly. Salma Hayek does a good job voicing the oddly-named Kitty Softpaws, a thief archetype to completely round out the merry quest party, as she creates a dynamic with our hero by not only being on the same level of cunning as him (arguably moreso) but she adds a nice touch of femininity to counter Zorrocat's machoism (ie. sanity, the voice of reason, etc.).
As for the actual story itself, I started to think it was a brilliant heist story, complete with treacherous locations, crazy competitors to the prize, and hijinks galore...but then the big conspiracy rears its ugly head and then plotholes consume all the credibility the story had.
So depending on how much you liked the Puss in Boots character, this film's for you.

I bet there were much lulz in the recording studio during one scene where they're up in the clouds because of these

For a more entertaining (spoiler-filled) review, go here.

The Dark Knight Rises
After the powerhouse that was "The Dark Knight," you'd think that with the final installment of this trilogy by Christopher Nolan about a more realistic look at the Caped Crusader, there would be precautions to make this thing go out with a don. For what it's worth though, it's a great end to the saga of Christian Bale, the gravel-throated Batman, as he faces 2 1/2 threats this time. The character of Bane has been uniquely re-imagined with an odd Sean Connery-esque voice to accompany the look. I will say that the plotholes riddle the story, trying to incorporate too much into this end of the franchise, as well as some dumb decisions regarding which comic storylines to use, but it's still a very satisfying end. Messy and nonsensical, but satisfying end.

Thank you Nolan-sensei. This was a most excellent trilogy.

For a more entertaining (spoiler-filled) review, go here.

Wreck-it Ralph
"Wreck-it Ralph" is a movie set in a video game world. For those who don't get/don't like video games, don't worry; this movie is still solid. It's like a Pixar movie without the Pixar label, meaning it has all the trademark elements of one.
A fantastical realm that's loosely connected to the human world? Check.
Misunderstood protagonist? Check.
Grand adventure far from home? Check.
Meeting of diverse and colorful (sometimes literally) characters? Check.
Bonding between two unlikely characters? Double check.
A day is saved, and the protagonist comes out of it a better person/thing? Check.
Heartwarming & funny mini-movie before the actual film that features almost 0 lines? Check
So is it so formulaic that it's boring?
Nope, nope, and more nope.
It's a roller-coaster of emotions with a lot of great story, engaging characters, true emotions, and a creative world. It's full of excitement, laughs, and surprising heart. Fully recommend watching it.

Just like in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" the unexpected cameos are EVERYWHERE!

For a more entertaining (spoiler-filled) review, go here.

Skyfall
I can honestly say that I can't remember a THING from the previous James Bond film "Quantum of Solace."
Thankfully, the latest installment in the 007 movies featuring Daniel Craig has absolutely nothing to do with it.
"Skyfall" has a lot of the trademark James Bond movie charm in it: suave British man shooting bad guys, romancing beautiful women, driving a fast car with cool gadgets etc. However, this film takes several different approaches to the formula. To start with, after a horrible accident that occurred before the Adele-sung opening credits, he has found himself as less the paragon of secret agent man, and thus has to find his groove back. Q is no longer an old man of any kind, but more of a teenage boy genius with computers...easily forgiven given the times. The villain is as hammy as ever (maybe even more so than previous ones since he's an odd mix of fabulousness and master planner), but they make it interesting by giving him ties to both Bond and his boss Judy Dench. And while it IS a quite a spectacular spy thriller for about 2/3 of the film, it stops being that near the end and it becomes a strange hybrid of James Bond, protecting the important gal in his life, and "Home Alone" gone deadly.
Overall, a great film that plays homage to the great Bond films before it as well as establishing new things that make it its own creation.

"Casino Royale's" spy car was just sad. Thankfully, this guy makes a return appearance as the Bond spy-car of choice. And there was much rejoicing in the theaters when it did show up

Rise of the Guardians
Based on the trailers, you could've sworn that this was Dreamworks trying to blend "The Avengers" with classic fables from childhood...that's almost what happened. "Rise of the Guardians" is actually a very (after having read the books, the adjective is now EXTREMELY) loose adaptation of a series of books by popular children's book author William Joyce (he did the book that Disney's "Meet the Robinsons" was based off of), where he gives the classic fable characters something of a re-vamped origin and abilities and personalities (All of which are awesome. Really, read the 2 picture books and the 3 children's novels and be amazed at how much retooling one creative man can give public domain characters).
As for the film, it's a pretty good tale. The main character is Jack Frost, or as many people called him when they saw him in the 2nd trailer, "bishonen bait." He's troubled because in this world, all myths are only real and empowered as long as people believe in them, and he's in a sort of null area since he's still kind of known but not well enough that people care to make holidays about him. So apparently, long ago, the Man in the Moon commissioned several beings of well-renown to be the Guardians of Childhood, and he just decided to add Jack Frost to their ranks. The Guadians consist of Santa Claus (now a semi-angry Russian man), an Australian Easter Bunny, a...strange, hummingbird-esque Tooth Fairy, and the mute, but cute Sandman. They're out to stop the evil Bogeyman, known simply as Pitch, as he's recently come into the power of infecting the Sandman's dreamsand to turn into nightmares. And the race is on for the Guardians of Childhood to beat this sucker back into the shadows where he belongs. And speaking of belongs, Jack Frost also has the internal struggle of not knowing his identity before he became a force of nature, and how such a free-spirited individual fits into such a group as the Guardians.
While the story is pretty solid, the locales creative, colorful, and well-fleshed out, and the characters likable, relatable, and entertaining, the main problem I have with this picture is the logic-gap in the belief-power system. Heck, as the world grows more into despair, the Guardians become weaker than newborn kittens...which really irritates me since their power and lives are essentially in the hands of naive, easily-swayed, children...it further bothers me since the books established these beings as powerful even WITHOUT the support of children.
However, given my love of stories featuring ragtag teams of misfits, as well as stories involving fun-loving characters coming to grips with who they are and what they were, in addition to a compelling villain with a sympathetic backstory (even moreso because I read the books...yeah, I'm going to keep harping on y'all reading the books because they are really easy reads), I'd say this movie is another gold star for Dreamworks, right after "How to Train your Dragon" and "Shrek 2."

AVENGERS, ASSEMBLE! Oh wait, was this the right caption?

The Nightmare Before Christmas
Hailed as one of Tim Burton's masterpieces, "The Nightmare Before Christmas" is a musical movie that fully encompasses both his macabre visions with his whimsical madness. It shows how one dude, tired and bored of living in his singular goal of making each Halloween more terrifying than the last, chance encounters a different holiday and the feelings that it brings with it. However, when trying to bring this new sense of joy and wonder to the denizens of his dark town, they completely don't get it. And when he tries to bring Christmas into terms they understand, their tunnel-vision into making things dark and scary warp what Christmas really is, and while our protagonist Jack Skellington does his best to keep his original outlook on Christmas, he eventually get it in his head to improve on Christmas with his town's macabre machinations.
Overall, this film is worth looking at for its marvelous stop-motion wizardry, compelling themes, and the most whimsical-creepy musics composer Danny Elfman's done.

First you take the creepy:

then you add the whimsy:
et voila! Tim Burton classic!


The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
So the main issue with the "Lord of the Rings" for some fans was that they omitted many many things that would've made the movie perfect in their eyes...for "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey," however, the problem was that they ADDED too much to the film. Why add stuff to an already short story? Well, I believe it was just so Peter Jackson could jackhammer the fact into the audience's skulls that they are, in fact, watching a prequel to Lord of the Rings. The addition of things like Radagast the Brown wizard & his animal friends, orc opponents hunting their merry band, and the pointless Elijah Wood cameo at the beginning really stretch the film.  Further weakening the film is the cast itself.  The titular hobbit, Bilbo Baggins, is...not entirely likable in this installment. But since I read the book I know he gets better as time goes on, and to be fair, he does demonstrate some likable characteristics partway through the film, like gumption, bravery, and selflessness. Not just him though, the rest of the crew can be described as 12 bumbling, brash short guys, 1 dwarf who is essentially Aragorn-lite, and wise ol' Magneto in a pointy hat. The Fellowship of the Ring was a  group that had so much more diverse characters and dynamic personalities that they are infinitely more enjoyable than these...mostly homogeneous fellows. While it does have these flaws however, it's still a great action fantasy film. Can't wait to see how much they stretch out the other two installments though...=/

And so Gandalf asks, "What time is it?"

 For a more entertaining (spoiler-filled) review, go here.


Les Miserables
So this supposedly great Broadway musical has been given the Hollywood treatment.  It's exactly what it says in the title, "The Miserable People." This movie is a long series of scenes crafted specifically to tug at the audience's heartstrings and tear ducts. It's movies like this that disgust me, for forcing me to feel for these characters as they go through needless tragedy after needless tragedy.  While I wasn't exactly expecting a happy musical, the story itself is riddled with plotholes that make me scratch my head at the point of all this sadness.  There are also long singing parts that seem to capitalize on the actor or actress, without any real need to show background or scene transitions, something which I'm sure would look more impressive in a stage production, but on film, looks kind of simple.  In addition, the editing can be a bit choppy, giving this movie the strange dichotomy of being both rushed and dragging.
HOWEVER!
This movie is still worth seeing.
This movie is still worth seeing solely on the power of the performances by the many big-name actors and actresses gracing this dingy, dirty-looking film about sad things happening to sad people.
Hugh Jackman is a powerhouse as the man who has taken upon himself to be God's mercy to everyone he meets.
Anne Hathaway, despite her brief appearances in this film, leaves quite the lasting impression with her down-&-completely-out-on-her-luck Fantine.
Sacha Baron Cohen, who I cannot normally stand for his raunchy comedies, is a welcome bit of comedy, however ridiculous he is, because all the events prior to his showing up on screen were so emotionally draining for sadness, any laugh, however cheap, was welcome.
Even Russel Crowe, who many a critic of music and film are defaming for having a lackluster performance, leaves an impression on me of such a strong character despite his flaws, and even though his singing isn't up to par as these Broadway booming crooners, his voice has sort of a garage-rock-band feel to it that gives his vocal performance a unique flavor.
Overall, this movie's story blows, but the people in it are so full of passion (some more than others) that it's worth the 3 hours out of your life.

If you need a light-hearted parody after all those emotions, have some Animaniacs!

For a more argumentative-between-two-critics review, go here and here.