I don’t normally walk out of a movie theater due to a film being so terrible because I can typically find something positive and worth watching in most movies. I am a positive guy and can really appreciate the movie-making process to the point of never really hating a movie. This movie absolutely PUSHED the limits of my positivity.

Seriously, there was nothing good about this film. Now, I don’t often say that about any film or use those kinds of descriptive words…but really folks, this movie isn’t worth anything. I saw this movie with my wife and another couple and if it wasn’t for our dear friendship with this couple, I would have wholeheartedly objected to even considering seeing this movie. The story was laughable, the characters were boring, the CGI was silly, and the whole concept was just pathetic.

It should have been a HUGE warning sign to Brendan Fraser and the rest of the cast when Rachel Weisz decided not to reprise her role after reading the script. Yeah, I agree with her. I can imagine her reading the script and laughing while she threw it in the trash can. The characters were so cliche and boring, and at times, you could visibly see the uncomfortable-ness in Brendan as he tried to resurrect a character that wasn’t great enough to begin with and try and feign some chemistry with an actress not even half the caliber as Weisz. By the way, isn’t about time for Brendan to try and step out of the “family friendly” roles for a bit? He plays basically the same guy in every movie, and all with the same haircut. I’m just saying.

Maria Bello stepped in to replace Rachel and performed just as expected, forgettable and cheap. There was nothing about her role that was unique, she was a half-as-talented blond version of Weisz with a bad British accent. The directors even tried to throw in a little joke at the beginning about her character “becoming a completely new person” as to try and get us to laugh and forget that we’re supposed to believe that THIS IS THE SAME PERSON!

Even the CGI, which has always been pretty cool in the Mummy world, was over the top. They “wow’ed” us with the “sand-time” and “peeling-away-flesh-and-particles” effects in the first Mummy and tried to keep it going in the 2nd, but in this movie, it just feels old and tried. We get it, you’ve perfected the art of blowing sand and eroding particles…what else do you have? Is that it?

The only highlight for me throughout the entire film was John Hannah. Once again he reprises his role as the comic-relief brother-in-law Jonathan, who always manages to bring the audience back to earth with his witty one-liners, all the while making fun of himself and the movie…it’s very subtle. Without him in this movie, I might have walked out. He doesn’t save the movie or even make it for me, he just kept me in my seat and saved me $9 of waste.

Before you rip me a new one, let me tell you that I did like the original Mummy. I thought the action was great, the “sand-time” CGI was new and cool looking (the first time it was cool, not the 132nd time the producers used it), the chemistry between Fraser and Weisz was spot-on, and the story, although out of this world, was entertaining. To me, this movie was a cash-cow-cop-out. It was nothing more than a summer sequel to a franchise that was over after it started. Don’t waste your time or your money.

Content Warning: Rated PG-13 for adventure action and violence. There are a lot of pointless battle scenes involving dead creatures, so no real blood.

Seeing how my wife and I attended an advanced screening of Hancock before it opened, I am going to be careful not to reveal too much in my review. I felt like it was a great honor to write about a movie BEFORE it opened so I could truly inform my readers about whether or not to see it. Before I go any further, I want you to know that it is my opinion that this movie is worth seeing…but just don’t rush out in a hurry.

Now that we have the legalities out of the way, let me just tell you that whatever you have seen in the trailers and whatever sense you get about the story of Hancock, you are going to be very much surprised by the actual movie. Going into Hancock, I was expecting to see a totally different movie than what I did. Granted, I only chose to watch the opening teaser trailer and then one other trailer afterwards; I intentionally chose not to immerse myself in plot-revealing trailers that movies debut these days. I wanted to walk into Hancock with as little information as I could so as to not over-expect and end up being let down. Armed with an expectation of a summer superhero movie with a twist (the twist being that the superhero doesn’t actually want to be a superhero), I walked into Hancock expecting as much and left the movie feeling a lot more emotionally spent than what I thought I would.

The film stumbles a bit as it appears to be a comedy at first, then moves quickly to being dark, but then slides a little downhill towards a “take-it-serious” film. From the outset, a drunk hero with an attitude, who goes around saving people sounds pretty laughable and funny, but then it suddenly and quickly turns to a dark movie. The character of John Hancock (Will Smith) is not a likable guy. He is rough, and not just comically rough like you’d expect out of lovable Smith, he is a straight up jerk. Will Smith fans will have a hard time with this one. His distrust and general indifference towards human beings really pervades everything that he is about, so much so that for most of the movie I was finding myself rooting against him. I don’t root against Will Smith. I love Will Smith.

As strong as his performance is though, there are quite a few things about this movie that are just plain corny. There appears to be a few sequencing errors that left my wife and I wondering why they were filmed in that order…scenes that don’t make sense in the setting of the story. There is also a multitude of back story that we weren’t given yet had to make guesswork about because without it, the story doesn’t connect correctly. Let’s just say that the majority of my friends didn’t even know Charlize Theron is in the movie, and towards the middle of the film when she is heavily involved in another storyline (which is the storyline that eventually took over the movie) it was apparent that the movie shifted into more of a melodrama than a “summer blockbuster superhero movie.”

The first half of the movie is really exciting and engaging, the special effects and action sequences are spectacular and I love the ride that the film takes you on. One of the more subtle characteristics of Hancock that I find really interesting is that when he flies, he looks awkward. His arms flail about to his sides like he doesn’t really know how to fly like “Superman” because he’s not! He’s just a regular guy who happens to be indestructible and immortal and who also happens to fly. I was glad to see the director keep Hancock as human as he could because the story, I felt, would suffer if he was “more than life” or over-the-top superhero.

I really think Jason Bateman is a perfect cast in this movie. I have always liked him as an actor, fell in love with him in Arrested Development, and think that his role in Hancock is one of the more endearing and “saving” characters of the film. His character is humble and wise, trusting in Hancock when he’s too screwed up for anyone else to give him a chance. His discernment in Hancock’s situation truly serves as a cornerstone for how heartfelt and caring Bateman’s character is. He added that much needed laugh when the movie tried too hard to engage your emotional core, it was like his character was telling us, “Look, this is about a guy who is immortal like Superman but who drinks and cusses, let’s not get too carried away with reality.” Besides the humor he adds to his roles, I also think, as an actor, he adds a comical class and charm to the films he makes.

It was a very enjoyable film regardless, it just needed to pick a direction that it wanted to go in and stay the course. It’s not one of Will Smith’s best films and it won’t be remembered as his strongest, but it will make a lot of money and be at the top…for about a month, until The Dark Knight comes out of course.

I am a huge sucker for sweeping epics that involve amazing imagery and CG effects. I love being a part of a movie that its scope and reach is so far beyond my little world, it’s a great place to get lost in and forget the world we live in now. The Chronicles of Narnia is that kind of movie for me. I have read all of the novels and completely lost myself in the world with the Pevensie children and the Narnians, and never really wanted to come back to my world, and I think that’s a good effect that movies like this can have on you.

But, with all of its wonder and “bigness” I think the true magic of the Narnia films finds itself in the minutia of the characters and their emotional development. I love that these movies revolve around 4 seemingly young kids, because their innocence is so attractive and it lessens the jadedness that an adult would have dealing with all of the situations the Pevensie children go through. Can you imagine watching the Narnia films starring Mel Gibson, Johnny Depp, Julia Roberts, and Meg Ryan?? What an emotionally draining movie that would be, but through the eyes of 4 kids, we can handle it, we accept the talking animals, trees, and ice witches, we can connect with them.

It’s going to be natural for me to compare this movie to the last, and in doing so, I must say, that I actually preferred the first Narnia over this one. I say that with a slight, “but” because I feel like in any “movie series” the first and the last are most times (I didn’t say ALL THE TIME) always going to be the better films comparatively, because the first one is in its own category, it’s the debut of a story we have imagined in our heads for years, so by default, it will always reign as the best…until we arrive at the end. The last movie in a series closes up the chapter, it ends the story, it seemingly ties the strings together, it’s a very anticipatory movie; everyone looks SO MUCH forward to seeing how a story will end. So, all that to say, that I don’t want to compare this one or the rest to come with the FIRST one, I will just compare the newest installments to the previous ones until I reach the end.

Standing on its own feet, Prince Caspian is a really good war movie. Yes, a children’s fantasy war movie. At nearly 2 and a half hours long, this movie is essentially 90% fighting scenes with about 5% Narnian magic, and 5% human feelings. I don’t mean that in a purely negative fashion, I’m just saying that this was a very war laden movie. For the first 20 or 30 minutes or so, they setup the story with the Pevensie children being called back to Narnia 1300 years later to help the underground Narnians fight off the Tel Marine’s, and then they let the amazingly beautiful effects team dream up big war scenes that take place at the Tel Marine castle, the Narnian base (which is a big cave dwelling built around the Stone Table which I thought was a very nice touch in leaving it in tact), and along the river where we get to see Aslan in action.

The action in and of itself was enough to make me see the movie and I’ll probably see it again just for that, but it was ultimately the Narnia lore and history that kept me engaged. I will say that you should really read the books first to truly understand the world of Narnia because the movies haven’t and will never be able to fully capture this world on film. I’m not saying that if you haven’t read them you won’t enjoy the movies, because they do give you enough story and background to keep you informed, but it would definitely add to your experience. A lot of people have argued and complained about the differences between the book and the films and the lack of material added or the creative shortcuts the filmmakers have taken, and I’d like to use a quote one of my commenters “johnny thunder” wrote about the comparisons between film and book:

“the problem with a lot of adaptations is that people can’t separate themselves from the original context if they read the book first. in a lot of cases the movie is supposed to be different. sometimes the book can’t be directly translated and in other cases the author just wanted to do something different with the different media. of course the movie isn’t going to be like the book, it’s not a book. it’s a movie. moving media is always going to be different than reading because it takes away the imagination that you use when you read the book…”

I think you need to watch a movie for the movie, don’t walk into a movie thinking you’re going to see a visual book, because I agree with “johnny” in that your imagination and what you dreamed up while reading the book won’t EVER come close to what the filmmakers dream up, it’s just not going to happen. That being said, I didn’t like the inclusion of a part of Susan’s character that wasn’t in the books and doesn’t make sense to who Susan really is. I won’t reveal it but if you watch the movie and have read the books, you’ll see what I am talking about. I thought it was a cheap ploy by the 2008 filmmakers to modernize a sweet and innocent tale.

Prince Caspian is a very good summer film that honestly keeps you entertained both with stunning imagery and effects, and contains some real heartfelt performances from some young actors. Not to be forgotten though were the performances behind the images: the voice actors! Take for instance my favorite Narnia character Reepicheep, I thought he was by far the better, if not the best, character in Prince Caspian. They could have went the way of “Pussy In Boots” like in Shrek, but no, they, both Lewis and the filmmakers, created a rat that is intense, loyal, trustworthy, sarcastic, and ready to die for his people! I loved him in this movie! Watch out for him…

Don’t miss this movie! Go see it in the theaters to truly experience the world of Narnia.

Content Warning: Rated PG for epic battle action and violence. It’s Narnia, there is a lot of war violence, but very little to no blood. Take your kids.

I must be honest and admit that when I first heard that RDJ (Robert Downey Jr.) was going to play Iron Man, I was curious about the choice. That’s not to say that I didn’t or do not like RDJ, it’s just that he’s been off the radar for a while, and I didn’t know whether this movie would be the best “comeback movie” for him or not. And before you guys say anything, I know, I was definitely proven wrong. I literally, after seeing the movie, can’t think of a better actor I would want to play Tony Stark than RDJ. He had the perfect mix of abrasiveness, charm, sarcasm, wit, and arrogance to play someone as notable as Tony Stark. I’m sure you obsessed comic book fans will agree.

One of the best parts of Iron Man was the show-stopping sequences of special effects. The gadgetry and creative weaponry on display were amazing. I know there are a lot of special effects in blockbuster movies and it’s normally not worth mentioning, but in this movie, the effects weren’t overdone or out of sync with the rest of the action going on in the scene. I thought it flowed very smoothly with the rest of the film.

There is definitely a subtle under current running throughout the movie that deals with war and technology and America’s view and stance in the “War on Terrorism.” I didn’t think it was overly anti-war or anything, but it was very apparent by numerous scenes where and how the director and/or actors felt about our current situation in the Middle East. It was a little disheartening to see the “stereotypical” Middle Eastern terrorists hiding out in the caves; it seemed a little too cliche. It wasn’t a detractor from the movie for me, it was just another “Americanized” view of terrorists that we’ve all seen.

Overall, it was an absolute joy of a movie. I don’t think I’ve seen such a complete movie, in that every aspect seemed to hit the nail on the head in regards to excellence, in a long time. From the sound, to the score, to the story, to the actors, to the direction, to the effects, to the emotion, to the comic book excitement…the whole movie just blew me away!

Oh, and by the way, if you haven’t seen it yet, stick around after the credits, you won’t be sorry.

Content Warning: Rated PG-13 for some intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence, and brief suggestive content. There were a few scenes that showed Tony Stark’s “way with women” that were a bit surprising in their sexuality, but nothing too over the top. It reminded me of Transformers in that it had scenes that intentionally were sexual, just so that they could satisfy that component of a summer PG-13 comic book movie…