Moderate Spoilers Follow

The retired soldier / hitman / warrior who gets call back into action to save / avenge someone is a cinematic formula that has been played out repeatedly. Due to films like Man on Fire, Kill Bill, Taken, Under Siege, etc. the audience knows exactly what to expect from the plot progression of films in the genre. Thankfully John Wick knows what kind of movie it is and does not try to shake up the formula to be original. It instead focuses its energy on perfecting the elements of its genre. And in that endeavor John Wick is very successful.

The film stars Keanu Reeves as the recently widowed, retired hitman of the title. When his car is stolen and his dog killed, Wick decides to pursue the thieves and use a special set of skills he’s gained over a long career to avenge his dog and release his pent-up grief over his wife’s death. Needless to say, the population of NYC decreases quickly over the next 100 minutes.

And ohhh it is so much fun to see the bodies drop. John Wick is directed by Chad Stahelski and David Leitch, both former stuntmen who have worked on movies such as The Matrix, 300 and Serenity. Through their experience they are able to craft incredibly exciting, impressive and well-coordinated gunfights and combat. The spectacle is not unlike watching a highly skilled video game player dominate in a popular first-person shooter. John Wick is a very entertainingly efficient killer. The world Stahelski and Leitch create around John and his unfortunate victims is surprisingly fleshed out and different from what I’ve seen before. The underground world of hitmen is extensive, professional and lavish. There is honor and respect among these evil men and women, similar to samurai culture. If John Wick doesn’t garner a sequel, then I’d really like to see another film set in this world focusing on someone else; it’s that interesting.

Keanu Reeves isn’t any more dynamic than he has been in his more recent films, but his stoic nature works well with the character. When he needs to, he brings a welcome quiet intensity to some of the heavier scenes. Michael Nyqvist, on the other head, is a pleasure to watch throughout. A character who starts out as a generic Russian mobster continuously evolves into a villain with a distinct personality. Willem Dafoe, Adrianne Palicki, Ian McShane and Lance Reddick are all good in their supportive roles, but never given much character development. The film carries a serious tone overall but with a handful of well-timed and well-delivered instances of humor.

John Wick is a great action film, but the third act is mildly anti-climactic. Overall, you are still left with a great sense of satisfaction when you exit the theater. However, I feel like it had potential to be something even greater. If the film had delved deeper into why John was so intent on killing everyone connected to his dogs’ murderers and became more of a character study in addition to a very well shot thriller, we may have had something truly great on our hands. Perhaps Stahelski and Leitch knew they would be out of their depth if they had attempted such a feat, this being their directorial debut. Maybe they’ll go the route of The Raid films. The first being an exercise in action, the second being a perfection of action and drama. Let us hope this is not the last time we see the world of John Wick.

Grade: B+

Oh Adam Sandler, what has become of you as of late? Your last 5 films – Grown Ups, Just Go With It, Jack and Jill, That’s My Boy and Grown Ups 2 – have a combined rotten tomatoes score of 59%, an average of 11.8%. Ouch. But hey, most of those made money, so why fix what isn’t broken, right? Perhaps in an effort to recapture some of his former comedic freshness and energy, Sandler has reteamed with two colleagues from one of his best films, The Wedding Singer: Director Frank Coraci and costar Drew Barrymore (whom he also paired with in the rather successful 50 First Dates).  Though Blended is a better film than what he’s put out recently (I assume; I couldn’t make myself sit through any of the five films I mentioned above), it is far from Sandler’s best.

Blended follows Sandler as family man Jim, a widowed father of three girls who works at Dick’s Sporting Goods.  Barrymore plays Lauren, a divorced mother of two boys who organizes rich people’s closets for a living.  After an ill-fated and decidedly unsuccessful date, both characters separately receive vouchers for the same fully-funded safari trip in South Africa.  Upon arriving and discovering The-Date-They-Want-to-Forget is standing before them, they decide to pretend to be one big, blended family so that they can all keep using the reservations under their benefactors name.  “Hilarity” ensues.

Let’s start off with what works in this film. The family dynamics and the conveyance of life lessons are successful and engaging, if not especially authentic or original. Every member of the blended family has a personality and a story, and they each demonstrate a moment of development and growth. This is a welcome element when one considers that such character development could easily have been cast aside in favor of another dozen flat and childish jokes.  It helps make the film feel more well-rounded.  I was also mostly pleased with the budding romance between Sandler and Barrymore.  These actors have known one another for many years, and their real-life friendship works in their favor as their characters start to open up to one another.  In the film, it is each star’s interactions with the other’s children that really brings them together, helping them to better understand one another.  I know it’s a bit of a hokey approach, but in a mostly lackluster film, the construction of these relationships is one of the stronger points.  

What doesn’t work so well is the comedy. ‘Meh’ to the MAX. It is incredibly generic, inorganic and forced. Yes, there are moments where I genuinely laughed out loud, but I spent most of the film cringing at the awkward and predictable gags.  The humor is very much in line with Adam Sandler’s reputation; if you’ve seen his films before, then you know what to expect.  Now, familiarity is not necessarily a bad thing, I just wish it was more familiar with his earlier work than his recent efforts. Blended feels like a step back, rather than a step forward. It lacks creativity,  and the film is littered with completely unnecessary Happy Madison cameos.

In the end, my experience was mixed.  I liked a good portion of the family dynamics and the developing romance between the two stars, but the comedy was certainly hit and miss.  Actually, it was mostly miss.  I haven’t even touched on the portrayal of the African continent in this film; I understand that it’s a comedy and that it wants to focus on the light-hearted and cheery parts of life, but the environments in which the characters find themselves and the people with whom they interact are very stereotypical.  Not that I expected much more from an Adam Sandler movie.

If you’re a fan of Sandler’s recent efforts, then you’ll love this film. If you’re looking for the more creative and charismatic Adam Sandler of The Wedding Singer, Happy Gilmore and 50 First Dates, you’ll likely be disappointed.  Let’s hope that his next effort is a return to form.  


Grade: C-

Let me be crystal clear on one point before slicing into my review of Chef. You should not… I repeat... should NOT see this movie on an empty stomach. I was warned of this in the one trailer I saw for the film, and I did not heed the warning. Oh God why did I not heed!? Watching as Favreau and other characters diced, sautéed, broiled, fried, mixed, garnished and consumed various mouth-watering and delicious looking dishes throughout the film was simultaneously glorious and torturous. After exiting the film I bolted across the street to Chipotle, hopped the line and proceeded to feast on everything as bewildered employees and customers looked on. Ye be warned, dear readers.

I’m a fan of Jon Favreau. Iron Man, Elf, Zathura and Made were all great movies. His last couple of efforts, Iron Man 2 and Cowboys & Aliens, weren’t bad adventures but left something to be desired. Cowboys & Aliens, in particular, received quite the cold reception from moviegoers and critics upon its release. I happily report Favreau’s latest effort is a return to form for the director.

In what may be a veiled representation of Favreau’s own recent career path, his character Carl Casper is a celebrated chef at an upscale LA restaurant who is convinced to play it safe when a famous food critic visits. The review does not go so well. After trying to take back control of the kitchen, Carl is fired and goes back to his creative roots by starting a food truck. He must try to balance work with being a good father.

Having written, produced, directed and starred in this film, Favreau cooks up a very well balanced and paced feature. The dramatic and comedic aspects both have a strong presence, but neither is ever overwhelming or conflicting. This is made possible by a wonderful supporting cast. John Leguizamo, Emjay Anthony, Sofia Vergara and Scarlett Johansson create strong characters in support of Favreau who truly feels like a man who loves his work. Watching him wrestle with figuring out how to be a good father while continuing to do what he loves really helps carry the film from start to finish. Interestingly, social media becomes a central plot point that drives much of the action, showing how much influence it can have in a person’s career. The film seems to celebrate the connections today’s social media makes possible, with no hint of cynicism, as is often popular.

Chef is a movie about celebration. It celebrates connection, integrity, friendship, family and food. Especially food, oh man. The cooking scenes are elaborate, impressive, beautifully shot, and are never without reason. Just as social media is the newest way to form connections, food is one of the oldest. Pairing these together and using them to help tell the story of a man reestablishing his place in the world and his son’s life is very successful. My compliments to the Chef.

Grade: A-

MINOR/MEDIUM SPOILERS FOLLOW

It’s story time, dear readers. Many winters ago, in a faraway land called Ludlow, Massachusetts, lived a pale, spritely lad named Mike Muse. This freckled youth bonded with his best mate over a mutual love for the Toho Godzilla franchise. Fast forward 15 years and these two friends, now ruggedly handsome, uncomfortably attractive burly men, are shaking with excitement like little girls, their voices in a far higher octave than normal, as the theater lights dim and the screen comes alive to show Gareth Edward’s new take on Godzilla. I preface my review with this personal tale so that you know that however objective I tried to be, I am no doubt in some way subconsciously biased toward this film/franchise. Or… perhaps more qualified? In any case, I’m here to tell you that Godzilla (2014) is awesome. It embodies that over-used descriptor better than anything in recent memory.

That doesn’t mean I don’t have a few gripes with this new iteration, but I did walk away with an utter sense of satisfaction. Godzilla follows the story of Ford Brody, played by Aaron Taylor-Johnson, an explosive ordinance disposal specialist for the navy as he travels to Japan to bail his father out of some trouble, played by the magnificent Bryan Cranston. When enormous creatures start to wreak havoc on the world, Ford struggles to make it back to his family in San Francisco.

As has always been the case with the Godzilla franchise, and movies like it, it is very difficult to create a human story that is as interesting as the events happening around them. Godzilla isn’t concerned with anything as small as one human, so how do you tie a few characters story with that of the big green guy himself? Gareth Edwards is more successful in this endeavor than not, but isn’t able to completely weave the two together without it feeling slightly disjointed. Aaron Taylor-Johnson is a serviceable lead, doing what he needs to do when he needs to do it, but felt a little stiff. He is never unlikable though. Elizabeth Olsen is very talented, but isn’t given a lot to do here as Johnson’s wife. Bryan Cranston is the shining radioactive gem of the cast, and it is his character that proves to be the most interesting. Ultimately, for a blockbuster like this, all that matters is that the story between the action sequences is engaging enough to tide you over, and it most certainly is here.

One aspect of the film that is bound to be divisive is the pacing. Some viewers may not be so happy with the amount of screen time the titular monster gets in the first two acts. There is a lot of teasing and build-up, which ends up being very true to form for the Godzilla franchise. However you may feel about the amount of build-up, though, one thing we will all agree on is that the payoff is ridiculously worth it. Once the big guy is on full display in the final act, we see a lot of him, and I can’t emphasize enough how awesome it is. Sorry, there’s that word again. It’s just so fitting.

From a filmmaking and technical viewpoint, this film is astounding. The visual effects are absolutely top notch throughout. The creature designs are well thought out and the destruction is realistic and glorious, as well as feeling deserved. It doesn’t feel like destruction for destruction’s sake, which was a problem I had with, say, Man of Steel. Perhaps the greatest success is the sense of scale. Edwards employs a plethora of clever and intelligent cinematic tricks to relay to the viewer just how big these creatures are. One cannot help but be in awe. When things aren’t exploding, Edwards uses strong colors and interesting camera movement to add some style to the quieter moments. Your eyes will never be bored or overwhelmed. As far as the 3D goes, it is obvious this film was not made with it in mind (which is great in my opinion). It isn’t bad, but it doesn’t really add anything to what you’re seeing. Save your money and see it in 2D.

Whether you’re a longtime fan of the Godzilla series like me, or someone who actually went outside and talked to people, I’ll be damned if you don’t walk out of the theater with the goofiest and giddiest grin on your face. Though the middle of the film may lull a little, the strong opening and closing acts help create a truly satisfying cinematic adventure. It doesn’t hurt there are a lot of sly nods to the films that came before, which I couldn’t help but smile knowingly at when I caught them. Almost no film has had a better sense of massive action. Those of you with a history of heart problems might want to steer clear of this one. Everyone else? Go see it. You won’t be disappointed.

Grade: A-

*Minor spoilers follow*

Artificial intelligence has a long and sordid past in cinema. Often paired with frightening robotic vessels and an apathetic homicidal demeanor, few incarnations depict sentient beings born out of man’s technology as caring, emotional or kind. They often want to wipe out or control humanity out of self-interest, or some programed directive gone awry. HAL 9000, Skynet, Agent Smith of The Matrix, the Puppet Master of Ghost in the Shell, fembots, all would gladly see all of us die. Okay, the fembots weren’t artificially intelligent, but they were the scariest androids of them all! On the other side of the coin, there have been some great, friendly A.I.s to remind us that it’s also possible that we are, in fact, not hurtling toward our own downfall at the hands of our new robotic overlords. The Iron Giant, Walle, and the recent Her give us hope. Transcendence, to its benefit, forgoes drawing a definite line in the sand on whether the A.I. depicted is benign or hostile. The question remains throughout.

Transcendence stars Johnny Depp as Will Caster, Rebecca Hall as his wife Evelyn Caster, Paul Bettany and Morgan Freeman. They are computer scientists on the verge of creating the first artificial intelligence. When a radical group of anti-technologists, fearful of the threat an A.I. could pose to humanity, attack research facilities and shoot Will with bullets laced with radiation, they decide to map and upload Will’s consciousness to a computer in an effort to save him. From there it is Will and Evelyn against the world.

The film if directed by Wally Pfister, long time cinematographer of Christopher Nolan. As such, there are some beautiful shots throughout the movie, especially with water (a recurring motif). The leads do a fine job with the roles they are given, and there are some interesting ideas and graphics presented. The film tries to balance plot and character development equally, and is successful on that front, but neither aspect ends up feeling substantial. What we are left with is an interesting movie that feels thin. The plot feels like it should be bigger and more complex then it becomes, that it should have more weight in the world beyond the characters involved.

On the plus side, it’s fun to never be quite sure what A.I. Johnny Depp’s true intentions are. Is he a power hungry program bent on controlling the world? Is he a true representation of his former self thinking only of his and Evelyn’s survival? Is he trying to make the world a better place or trying to change the world to better suit himself? You may be surprised by the ultimate answer.

All in all, although the film did not feel that substantial, it was still an interesting experience that raised some thought-provoking questions, even if these ideas are under-explored.

Grade: B-

Video game movies have a hilariously bad track record. Examples including Max Payne, Silent Hill, Doom, BloodRayne, Mario Bros., etc., have led most fans to dread adaptations of their favorite game series rather than rejoice. To be fair, there are a few decent and entertaining efforts such as Tomb Raider, Resident Evil, and Hitman (though I’m usually alone on that last one). It is surprising, then, that Need for Speed not only proves to be the best video game adaptation to date (literally breaking the track record), but is a great film to boot.

Those of you familiar with the video game series will know that there is no actual narrative in the source material, only fast cars and adrenaline-fueled races. This provides director Scott Waugh with a setting and theme, but gives him freedom in crafting his own story within it. The film follows Toby Marshall, played by two-time Emmy Award-winner Aaron Paul in his first post-Breaking Bad role. Toby owns an auto-body shop and street races on the side. After a business deal with his former rival goes sour, Toby enters the De Leon, the country’s greatest underground street racing tournament, to get revenge with the help of his crew and an unwelcome passenger.

It’s hard to talk about Need for Speed without mentioning its main competition, the Fast and Furious franchise. The film easily establishes itself as a different beast than the Vin Diesel vehicle (pun intended) by taking a more realistic approach to street racing and refusing to include a lot of hammy machismo. There are no computer graphics to be found in this film, which blew my mind after seeing it. The action is incredibly exhilarating, incorporating a lot of intelligent cinematography and point-of-view shots, which help tie it to the games. The decision to use all practical effects was brilliant. There may not be as many huge explosions as most modern blockbusters, but the fact that everything is real makes it feel more effective and exciting than even the most realistic CG. You’ll see in a lot of interviews with the director, cast and crew that this film aims to be a throwback to classic car films such as Bullitt and Vanishing Point, a goal they fully realize. Keen viewers will find a lot of Easter eggs and references throughout the movie for the films that inspired it.

Another element that helps Need for Speed stand out from similar fare is the pacing of the film. Though the action and race scenes are fast and exhilarating, the story is more drawn out (the film runs a quick 130 min), letting us get familiar with the various characters so that we are more invested when things go wrong. Humor is injected at just the right times to add moments of levity that balance out the overall serious tone of the film, which is something I feel is sorely lacking in the Fast and Furious series. Aaron Paul plays a charismatic lead, providing a strong core to the well-constructed film. Imogen Poots plays a fun sidekick, never feeling like window dressing. Dominic Cooper provides a good, but generic, villain.

Need for Speed takes the framework of a great adrenaline-fueled video game series but makes it something more. By looking to classic racing and car films for inspiration, the film reminds us just how good action movies can be when made practically, and that a strong storyline can be just as important as the action that drives it (pun intended. Sorry can’t resist). Whether you’re a car person or not, Need for Speed will both get your heart racing (last pun, I swear) and keep your eyes locked on the screen the whole way through. 

Grade: B+/A-

NUFEC writer Mike Muse attends a roundtable interview with Aaron Paul, lead actor of the upcoming film Need for Speed. There are *Spoilers* below. Ye be warned.

Mike Muse: This could be a franchise. Do you see yourself being a franchise guy? Need for Speed 2: Faster?

Aaron Paul: [Laughs] Um yeah, we’ll see. I had such an amazing time doing this film. I thought it was just such a fun story and a really good excuse to drive around this country of ours in very fast cars. And so yeah, if they want to do another one, if this film does well, then why not?

MM: Now you’re normally known for indie work and supporting roles but this is your first major lead. Are you starting to feel the pressure of it at this point? Like this is your movie, your name is on the marquee.

AP: The more I do interviews like this, yes [laughs]. People always say “Are you feeling the pressure? How are you taking all this pressure?” In all honesty I try not to think about it too much and the film comes out [March 14th] so we’ll know soon if it’s going to do well or not.

MM: We all think it will.

AP: Yeah, it plays well. I think the movie speaks for itself. I think it's a fun movie, and I think it has a great story. Be honest, the film surprised you, yeah?

MM: Yeah, definitely.

AP: See, it surprised me too when I read it. I just kinda had my own thought of what it may be, which is fine, but it's just something different.

MM: Is this something you would like to keep doing? These big budget films and being the lead?

AP: Not necessarily. It just depends on whether or not the character is there, you know? Right after Need for Speed I did a film that we did for, I think, $400,000. It's called Hellion. Super small, low budget, independent. I love those movies. So, yeah, just mix it up, trying to do something different.

MM: Did you ever play any of the video game series before getting the script?

AP: I did! I did. I remember when I made the switch to the iPhone, from the Blackberry, that was the first app I downloaded, or first game I guess. They had a Need for Speed game. I'm not really a gamer any more, but I was a big fan of those games.

MM: I had my own expectations of the movie, having played the video games, but what really surprised me the most was - it wasn't a message movie at all, but, those car crashes really made me think about the impact of street racing. I had never really thought about it. I thought, yeah, it's cool, but the car crashes were so real. Was it the realism that really drew you to this?

AP: Yeah and I agree with you. With this film, we obviously do not condone street racing whatsoever, but [the realism] is one of the reasons why Scott [Waugh], our director, wanted to do all of this practical, there was no CG. And these people are paying for their actions, you know what I mean? I think we're used to watching films where there's just a lot of CG, which is fine or fun and they have a purpose, but they're lying to us. A car can't jump in the air 500 feet, go through a building, and land on the other side without a scratch. I love that they wanted to do a throwback to how car movies used to be done, like Bullitt or Vanishing Point. That's what they pitched me when they sent me the script. When [Scott Waugh] told me what his vision was, that was his vision. He grew up on the sets of those movies and I love that he wanted to do it all practical.

MM: Speaking of when the script came your way, were you thinking you wanted to try to get into the world of action? Did you want to go into something a little bit more in that direction?

AP: Not necessarily. I did know that I wanted to do something lighter, because I'd been a part of a show that was so heavy for so long. And [Breaking Bad] was amazing! We were such a family. In between takes we were having the best time ever, but the character was just so heavy and he was just so tortured. I wanted to do something that kind of steered far away from that sort of thing. Will I play more tortured roles? I'm sure [laughs]. For some reason I like to put myself through that. But, again, I wasn't searching for this but it kinda just came my way out of nowhere and I'm so happy it did.

MM: People like to see you cry.

AP: [laughs] People like to see me in despair, yes.

MM: Now you've worked opposite Bryan Cranston, Christian Bale, etc., what's it like to have a character like this where you are the lead? What's the process like to not have someone like that to play opposite against?

AP: It's all the same, you know? I think we have a stellar cast. It's very strange to kind of be at the top of the call sheet, the pressure is slowly seeping in, but it felt the same. The whole goal is to get lost in the moment and believe what's actually happening. But working with Bryan was just, you know, going to work every day was a master acting class. I would not be the actor I am today if it wasn't because of him. Working opposite of him for 6 years, you just naturally become better at what you do. And then Christian, he's just incredible to watch.

MM: Did you approach this role any differently that you would have in your more serious roles like Breaking Bad? In terms of your preparation?

AP: Um, no, I approach it all the same. With this it's a different experience because with Breaking Bad you shoot an entire episode in 8 days and then this we shot in just under 4 months. So Scott always joked around saying "hey, you got a really big day today, you have two lines. Don't mess it up". You know, it's just a different thing.

MM: I thought you there was some good chemistry between you and the Marshall Motors crew. Did you guys know each other before or...?

AP: No, I didn't know any of the guys before. I did start meeting them before we started shooting, but once they were cast we would have dinner or just hang out. They were such great guys. They were all great, but how great was Scott Cudi? He's just so... what he did with that character is just so fantastic. Yeah, I love those boys.

MM: Is it any different for you acting while spending about half the time inside of a car?

AP: Yes! Usually you dread doing car scenes in anything just because it's become so claustrophobic, but I think with this film since I was actually driving it wasn't bad. But it's weird, the majority of the film takes place in a car, but they're really fast cars and they're fun cars.

MM: You mentioned Bullitt earlier and some of the other classic driving films, is that what you watched to get into character for this?

AP: Oh yeah! I was big fan of those films before, but Scott wanted me to watch all things Steve McQueen for this movie. I love all those films. There were a lot of little... I don't know if you guys noticed any of the little hidden Easter eggs in the film. Throwbacks to all of those great car movies.

MM: Is this the most pre-production you've done? Like you had to do the driver training and...

AP: Yeah, I had to gain a lot of weight to do this movie. And I'm sure if you guys re-watch the final season of Breaking Bad you see me slowly start to balloon out [laughs], but that was on purpose. Yeah this is definitely probably the most prep I've had.

MM: Did you like it? Not like it?

AP: I loved it, I thought it was great. Every day I went out to the track [for driving training] I got just a little better and I learned something new. There are tracks all over this country and you can go take these courses and learn how to do [driving tricks], and it's actually so much easier than you think. To slide the car around is super simple. To do a reverse 180 or even like a full 360 is actually kind of simple. But once you learn how to do it you just kind of tweek it and...

MM: We do it in the snow, but that's...

AP: [laughs] by accident.

MM: What was your favorite car to drive?

AP: My favorite car in the movie, hands down, was the Gran Torino. I just wanted that car so bad. We all wanted that car. There's two identical Gran Torinos that they gutted and made brand new. Beautiful cars, super fast. They ended up wrecking one of the cars during the first race by accident. And then the director and I were fighting over the remaining one. Neither of us got it.

MM: I think a lot of people would like to think that this is the second phase of Jesse after getting away from the Neo-Nazis.

AP: [laughs] Yeah I just drove straight into this film.

MM: What do you think of that theory?

AP: [laughs] Yeah, sure, why not? Jesse's doing okay. He went from driving a really beat up Toyota to... what, he left in that El Camino, right? And then into some crazy super cars.

MM: Once he drove out he realized he had all these racing abilities.

AP: [laughs]

MM: Are there any particular directors you'd looking forward to working with in the future?

AP: Oh man, there are so many. I just worked with one of my all time favorites, Ridley Scott. He's just such a legend. But I would love to work with Spielberg, [that] would be great. I mean, he [asked me to do] this, he didn't direct it but it was nice to be part of a project [where] his hands were involved. Paul Thomas Anderson, Wes Anderson, Nicolas Refn, Quentin Tarantino, there are so many great directors.

MM: How many times have you been arrested, thrown in jail, or beaten up in your projects? Because you get arrested two times even in this movie.

AP: Yeah, I tend to get arrested in everything I'm in [laughs], honestly. Actually, I really get arrested in everything I do, I don't know why, but pretty much every project I do you can look forward to me getting arrested.

MM: You take a good beating though too.

AP: Thank you! I like getting beat up, I don't know, what does that say about me? [laughs]

If you can remember back 8 years ago (yes, 2006 was 8 years ago), when Justin Timberlake was bringing Sexy Back, the Wii was making us rethink what a video game console could be (and making us giggle with pun opportunities), and you were Time magazine’s person of the year, a little movie called 300 took in over $200 million at the box office. Standing out for its hyper-stylized graphic violence, charismatic new lead Gerard Butler, and strong sense of grandeur, 300 finally get’s the follow-up fans have been waiting for.

It’s hard to label 300: Rise of an Empire as strictly a prequel or sequel (or even a sidequel), for it takes place both before, during and after the events of the first film. Here we follow the story of Themistokles, played by Sullivan Stapleton. Only Australia could produce such a rough and seasoned-looking actor, which certainly helps in this role. Themistokles is a life long Athenian soldier and military leader whose sole purpose is to defend the freedom of Greece. That freedom is threatened by Xerxes, our favorite giant bald Persian God-king of the first movie, and his right-hand woman and naval commander Artemisia, played by the great Eva Green.

Both main villains get some welcome character development, though the film only really capitalizes on those efforts with Artemisia. Eva Green chews up the scene every time she is on screen. She obviously had some fun with this role and ends up being the best character of the film. Sullivan Stapleton had a very tough act to follow, given that Gerard Butler couldn’t return. Although Themistokles is a weaker character than Leonidas, he is quite likable and ends up feeling like his own person (not an easy task). The rivalry between Themistokles and Artemisia acts as a strong framework for the later half of the film.

If you were a fan of the stylized action and violence that so strongly distinguished its predecessor, you’ll find a lot to love here. Director Noam Murro, who has but one other credit to his name, successfully carries on the stylistic approach of the first film. Slow motion, gallons of thick CG blood, hundreds of chiseled half naked men, it’s all here. A lot of the action takes place at sea with fun and destructive naval battles. To put it plainly, the action is pretty awesome.

There are many successful elements of 300: Rise of an Empire, but ultimately it does not feel as substantial as 300. The events feel very peripheral, always described or depicted in their relation to the events of the first film. This makes it feel less mythic and epic. The shift in time and character perspective leads to a less focused experience. The side characters are very thin as well.

All in all, 300: Rise of an Empire proves to be a worthy follow-up and a fun ride. The action is just as epic and satisfying as it’s predecessor. The story isn’t as strong or focused, but it’s bolstered by good characters, especially Eva Green. Look no further to sate your bloodlust.

Grade: B-/B

In this winter’s hilarious new rom-com Robocop, we are introduced to Alex Murphy (Joel Kinnaman), the handsome, dashing, and all-around-charming star of the Detroit Police Department. He solves crimes with the power of laughter and strategically placed kittens. Think Patch Adams, but with a 9mm. In a wacky turn of events, Murphy is critically injured through an attempt on his life by a grumpy weapons smuggler, who really just wants to be loved. To save his life, and up their potential revenue, the totally legit and not-shady-at-all company OmniCorp puts what is left of Alex in a new Robo-body to give him a second chance at life. With his new nigh-invulnerable body, arsenal of high tech weaponry, and incredibly efficient targeting system, Alex hits the streets using his newfound abilities to hug the crime out of Detroit. But tackling crime is easy; the real question is if Murphy can win his wife’s heart back.

Oh wait, nevermind, that was just a dream I had last night. Robocop (2014), coming out today, is Hollywood’s latest attempt at milking money out of an established cult sci-fi classic. Reboots and remakes are tough. They inherently have built-in expectations and almost never have any surprising material. They range from pretty terrible (Total Recall, The Invasion, Poseidon, The Day the Earth Stood Still) to better than the original (Dredd, 21 Jump Street, The Fly). If the filmmakers can get a handle on what made the original movie good, and are willing to develop the concept or material in unexpected ways, the film has the potential to be something great. It’s a little disappointing, then, that this newest exploration of the Robocop character turns out to be only a decent movie when it is clear throughout the film that the writers, producers, and director had a good understanding of what made the original Robocop, from 1987, great.

In an effort to keep its MPAA rating down to PG-13, the filmmakers chose to do away with the hyper violence of the original and alter the underlying message of the film from a satirization of Americans’ love for violence to a commentary on America’s need to force itself into the affairs of other nations combined with our simultaneous insistence on hyper security. While the film is not overly subtle in how it conveys its message, it is effectively crafted. However, it just isn’t as entertaining as the original. When I walk into a Robocop movie, I have certain expectations, among them that I will see an unabashedly violent action flick.  I think this update really loses something from not showing the bad guys getting blown away. You can’t help but be mesmerized by seeing a guy’s skin melt away after being doused in unmarked toxic chemicals and then literally explode when hit by a van. In the new toned-down version, there are no opportunities to laugh at the absurdity.

Alex Murphy’s home life is welcomingly fleshed out in this update. Abbie Cornish plays a sympathetic wife to Joel Kinnaman's mostly stoic lead. Gary Oldman does well with the underdeveloped lead scientist character he portrays. Michael Keaton doesn’t give his greatest performance, but he doesn’t detract from the film. Director José Padilha took what he learned in his Elite Squad series to craft some well-coordinated action scenes, though they are less frequent than you might expect and not varied enough. The production value is high with some really great CGI and interesting on-screen UI graphics in Murphy’s robo-helmet.

Robocop is more successful than most remakes, but can’t reach the heights of its source material because of its hesitation to own its absurdity. The film’s attempts at satirizing America’s obsession with security are welcome, but don’t connect back to the main story well enough. What we’re left with is a well crafted film that tries to do a lot of things, but can’t quite bring it all together to make a memorable movie experience.

Grade: C+

Bestselling author Tom Clancy passed away last year, leaving behind a huge legacy of popular action and spy novels.  Clancy’s most successful series follows the life and career of Jack Ryan, a CIA operative.  In Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit, Chris Pine steps in as the titular character, the fourth actor to take on the role, as Shadow Recruit is the fifth film to star Clancy’s popular super-spy. Hollywood A-listers Harrison Ford, Alec Baldwin, and Ben Affleck have all portrayed Ryan in previous film adaptations, some more successful than others.  After the decidedly lackluster The Sum of All Fears, Clancy can rest easy as Recruit is a step in the right direction for the franchise.

Dammit, where the hell is my contact lens. It’s down here somewhere…

This entry in the series is more of a reboot than a sequel to previous installments as the film opens with Jack Ryan attending university in London.  We watch as he quickly progresses from student, to marine, to undercover CIA operative on Wall Street.  Once the film catches up to present day, the main plot (a Russian terrorist cell plots to attack the US because of an oil pipeline going up in Turkey) takes off. The Jack Ryan character began as a spy in the Cold War; thus the Russian villains, despite the film’s present-day setting. Those crazy Russians, you’d think that they would know how to chill out more than anyone. Because it’s cold there. Get it? Okay, moving on.

Shadow Recruit doesn’t provide much in the way of innovation; it employs many common tropes of secret agent action-thrillers.  Bathroom fist fight?  Check.  Office building break in? Check.  Evil Russians?  Check.  Race against the clock?  Check-ah-roonie.  And though the film is more of a spy thriller than action-fest, when the fight scenes and chases do occur, it suffers from action-movie-syndrome: half the time, the shots are frenetic, cut too fast, and the camera is shaky and too close.  The other half of the time, however, is satisfyingly thrilling with several ‘damn that was cool’ moments.

Though the plot elements are familiar and the action is a bit confusing at times, Recruit proves to be a more intelligent thriller than other recent fare.  All the elements of the story are tied together cohesively.  The pacing of the film is a good balance of progress without rush, and Chris Pine proves to be a great fit for the character, which is developed in ways I didn’t expect.  This is a less seasoned Jack Ryan, out on his first real assignment, and it is evident in Pine’s performance.  Kevin Costner gives a satisfying performance as Pine’s boss and mentor.  Keira Knightly, with a slightly distracting American accent, plays Pine’s fiancé.  Ever elegant and easy-to-watch, her character is more than just window dressing for the film, as she becomes embroiled in the plot herself (a welcome choice from the screenwriters).  Although Kenneth Branagh demonstrates his directorial abilities with Recruit, he proves to be a rather weak villain.  He plays the character with blatant Russian stereotypes, and the limited background development we see makes little difference in our perceptions.  Think Ivan Drago from Rocky IV or Ernst Stavro Blofeld from From Russia with Love and you have a great idea of what to expect.

All in all, Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit is a very solid thriller.  If the producers wish to continue the franchise, they have a strong foundation on which to start, and an excellent lead in Chris Pine.  Though largely familiar, the film is strengthened by its well-developed hero and pacing to make for a brisk, fun 100-minute adventure.

Grade: B