X-Men: Days of Future Past

I have my favorite series. I love the Bond movies, love the Fast and Furious series and will watch just about any western out there. Some series, well, they just weren't on my radar. Take the X-Men series. I wasn't a comic book reader as a kid and never got into the successful Marvel series. So as a 30-year old movie nerd, I'm catching up. I've really enjoyed where the X-Men franchise has gone in recent years, including the highly successful and very positively reviewed 2014 X-Men: Days of Future Past.

In the not too distant future, a group of mutants is constantly on the run as robots known as Sentinels mercilessly hunt them down. This small group meets with a small group of fellow mutants -- the few remaining members of X-Men -- and come up with a desperate plan to ensure (or at least try) their survival. Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) will be sent back in time to 1973 hoping to turn the tide of the past and naturally, the future. His objective? Stop Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) from killing a man, an act that will ultimately doom all of the X-Men and mutants. His only hope is to find Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and Erik Lehnsherr (Michael Fassbender) and get the two enemies to put their horrific differences aside and work together to stop Mystique before they're all doomed. Can time-traveling Wolverine pull it off?

As I do from time-to-time, I hedge my bets. That's an awful plot description I've just provided you with. Like real bad. It's a whole lot of characters, series history, always confusing time travel, stars from two different timelines within the same series and my general lack of knowledge from the X-Men franchise. A winning formula for a review, ain't it? AIN'T IT? All jokes aside, it's an excellent film, one well worth seeking out.

I loved 2011's X-Men: First Class. A ton of fun, great cast, cool history-bending story, not much more you can ask for. This sequel amps things up in a big way. It brings the two timelines together, combining the first three movies of the series with the recent quasi-reboots. For this X-Men nube, it can be confusing at times, but it is always interesting. I won't get in-depth about my issues because much of my general sense of huh?!? comes from not knowing who everyone is. Director Bryan Singer returns to the series and keeps things going at an extremely high level. It's a series that ain't going anywhere either with the next release coming in 2016 supposedly. Color me psyched to see where it goes.

The beauty of these movies is the casting. Superhero movies aren't just MOVIE STAR movies anymore as both this series and the Avengers/Marvel universe has shown. These casts are filled with FREAKING actors and lots of them! McAvoy, Fassbender, Lawrence and oh yeah, Jackman comes back?!? It's crazy. All characters capable of carrying a movie by themselves work together to form a great ensemble. Jackman is the heart, the steadying force throughout as Logan, Mr. Wolverine himself, now traveling through time to save the world (and yes, it's that cool). Also reprising their roles are some huge names from the original trilogy including Patrick Stewart as Xavier, Ian McKellen as Magneto and Halle Berry as Storm, among several other familiar faces who make some quick appearances at the beginning and end of the movie.

The heart of the rebooted films is the trilogy of stars, McAvoy, Fassbender and Lawrence with Nicholas Hoult also returning (thankfully) as Hank McCoy, better known as Beast. No one is a cardboard cutout of a character, each of them feeling like a flesh and blood human...uh, mutant. I especially liked McAvoy as Xavier, tortured over his failures as his body too starts to fail him. He saw what could have been and is wasting away only to be reminded by Wolverine what still could be. Fassbender is criminally good at being Magneto, a villain you just can't get a read on. He's so impeccably cool and suave and a continuing great addition to the franchise. Lawrence is excellent too as Mystique, driven, stubborn and obsessed with doing what she believes is right. It's thankfully not a love interest but this triangle is fascinating to watch as they try to work together but...come on, that ain't gonna happen now, is it?

Who else to look for? Let's throw Peter Dinklage as Dr. Bolivar Trask, a brilliant scientist, engineer and weapons developer, Ellen Page as Kitty Pryde, a mutant with the ability to bend time and conscious, and a very cool part for Evan Peters as the future Quiksilver, helping Wolverine and Co. with an elaborate prison breakout. There's many other X-Men/mutants to mention as well, but most of them are given little explanation or background. I looked them up, and they're all parts of the X-Men world but with little to no regard for who/what they are, I struggled to keep them straight.

 Maybe the coolest part of these new X-Men movies is their general comfort level. I loved the Avengers movies, but let's be honest, they're schizo, over the top debacles of excess (and the better for it). The X-Men movies have a lot of the same ingredients but never goes for BLOCKBUSTER mode. These are movies content with characters, well-written story, some fun with history (including a great what-if about Magneto and the Kennedy assassination), and some....some explosions, much of it saved for the finale at the White House with President Nixon's life on the line. These are movies content to be a little different, and they're the better for it. I didn't love the movie -- and I had some issues with the ending -- but I liked it a lot. Definitely looking forward to seeing where the franchise goes from here.

X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014): ***/****

American Hustle

Although he worked semi-regularly in Hollywood since the late 1990s, director David O. Russell has definitely put his name on the map over the last few years, starting with 2010's The Fighter. He followed it up with the halfway decent Silver Linings Playbook, picking up an Oscar nomination while not winning, and if the buzz is right, he'll pick up another nomination for 2013's American Hustle. Will he? Will he win this time around? Only time will tell.

A self-made businessman, Irving Rosenfeld (Christian Bale) owns a string of dry cleaners in New Jersey, but that's just a front for his far more lucrative job. Working as a con artist, he sells forged art, pulls shady deals, but mostly he embezzles money from desperate men who can't do a thing because they're so desperate when they realize they've been fleeced. One day at a Christmas party he meets Sydney (Amy Adams), a goal-oriented young woman without the means to reach those goals. Polar opposites, they hit it off immediately, Sydney becoming an involved part of Irving's running cons, the money rolling in in piles. Well, it does for quite awhile at least. They've caught the eye of an FBI agent, Richie DiMaso (Bradley Cooper), who rather than have them serve a jail sentence, enlists them in helping him run his own operation, taking down corrupt politicians looking to take bribes. Irving and Sydney know the plan isn't so simple, but they're left with no other alternatives. None of them know how far this plan could really go.

Two things came to mind when watching this Russell-directed flick, working off a script written by Russell and Eric Singer. One, it pays tributes to films like it from the past, embracing a throwback, retro style that plays well from the opening credits. Those credits are the old studio credits that a movie from the 1970s would have used, not the polished ones greeting audiences now in 2013. The style is everywhere, the big hair, the ridiculously awesome-looking suits as style changed in a big way between the 1970s and 1980s, the giant, spacious cars, the great soundtrack featuring everything from folk rock to soft jazz and everything in between, just the general look of 'Hustle.' It's like a modern period piece, if a quick trip to the past in the 70s/80s. It feels like we're in that fun to watch, visual and a very fun trip in a time capsule. Russell clearly spared no expense, and it shows, the atmosphere, the look (even in the background) all adding another layer to the story.

As for that second thing, it's the casting, a very talented cast from top to bottom. Having worked with Russell last year in 'Playbook,' both Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence return here, both of them leaving their mark. Lawrence plays Irving's wife, Rosalyn, more than a little kooky in her conversations, beliefs and generally....yeah, everything she does. With Adams (vamping it up), Bale (chubbing it up), Lawrence (crazying it up) and Cooper (perming it up with an awesome hairdo), you've got an ensemble that should be able to carry any and all movies. And don't be fooled, this is the definition of an ensemble cast. Each of those actors are more than capable of carrying a movie on their shoulders, and they have so seeing their ample talents together in a single movie, it's a treat. Oh, and there's more. Also look for Jeremy Renner, comedian Louis C.K., Michael Pena, Shea Whigham, Anthony Zerbe, Elisabeth Rohm, Jack Huston, Alessandro Nivola and some actor named Robert De Niro appearing in a brutally efficient, uncredited one-scene cameo. Yeah, I guess that's a decent cast.

Heading into this movie, I had a general idea of what the story was about, an ever-moving story based somewhat loosely on a true story, dubbed Abscam. I don't want to give too much away, Russell's film covering a ton of ground in its 138-minute running time. It is a smart, well-written script that gives the cast a chance to show off their talents. Why does it work so well? It's simple; that story. Too often movies have to be about a gimmick, a message, about explosions, violence or sex. 'Hustle' instead chooses to focus on a crazy situation that keeps on getting crazy, all the cast getting their opportunities to step into the spotlight. It was refreshing to see a movie that's content to be just that; a good movie. The humor is never overdone, and there's a lot of it. I was surprised how funny the movie actually is, one laugh after another as this blackmail/entrapment scheme gets more and more complicated.

I can't pinpoint a weak acting performance in Russell's film, but for me, it's more than easy to identity the strongest performance here, and that goes to Christian Bale. Having already won a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his part in Russell's The Fighter (also co-starring Adams), Bale leaves another lasting impression with his most recent part. First of all, physically he put on a fair amount of weight, giving himself a nice little gut, while also favoring a truly amazing combover. In a weird way, Bale just commits to his Irving's goofy, gentlemanly style, but it's more than that. He makes Irving a real flesh and blood character, and oddly enough, one of the more sympathetic characters around because he's such an accomplished con man. Backed into a corner, Irving is worrying about maybe 13 different plates spinning all around him, also planning 15 or 16 moves ahead so he's always in control, even if it doesn't seem that way. It isn't necessarily a showy role, but that's what I liked it. Subtle in his delivery, letting his physical appearance add some laughs. It could be a busy Oscar season, but I'm betting money that Bale gets a Best Acting nomination. I hope he does.

If there is a weakness, it's that Russell's film covers so much ground with so many characters that by the end, it drags in parts. They all know what the ending will be, what it will offer and how it affects all the characters, but there are stretches getting to that point that slow things down needlessly. By no means is any of that complaint a dealbreaker. 'Hustle' is still an incredibly easy film to recommend. Could it use some tightening up? Probably, but you'll no doubt enjoy this one. Lots of talent, lots of fun.

American Hustle (2013): ***/****

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

Oh, how quick the time goes. It seems like the first The Hunger Games was hitting theaters way back in March 2013 and doing it well, earning over $400 million in the U.S. alone. Well, it is based off a trilogy by author Suzanne Collins and as good as the first entry was, the series certainly held a ton of promise going forward. The early returns for 2013's The Hunger Games: Catching Fire were incredibly positive, earning over $300 million in just three weeks in theaters. Does it hold up to the pressure of the vaunted second movie in a trilogy sub-genre?

It's been several months since Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) and Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) survived and won the 74th Annual Hunger Games, both struggling to cope with what they were able to survive. Their victory in the Games wasn't so simple or straightforward though. The Panem government is struggling to hold the Districts together, the people seeing that the government isn't so perfect, all of it caused by seeing Katniss and Peeta's defiance in almost choosing suicide rather than one of them winning the previous Hunger Games. While struggling through their own issues, the Game's winners are required to go on a victory tour, taking a train across the 12 districts until they finally end up in the Capital. With each passing district though, the defiance and unrest grows bigger and bigger, leaving Panem President Snow (Donald Sutherland) little choice but to do something desperate in hopes of turning the tide in favor of the government.

SPOILERS STOP READING SPOILERS Because I'm not sure who's read the books, who's seen the trailers, who's looked for possible spoilers, it is rather difficult to write this review without giving away a pretty major spoilers about where the story goes in the second half. Watching previews, it's pretty obvious what's going on, but I don't want to be the one blowing the surprise so be forewarned as you continue reading. SPOILERS FROM HERE ON IN

My personal favorite of the trilogy, I was very curious to see what director Francis Lawrence did with the series' second entry. The second film in a trilogy is pivotal, movies like Godfather 2 and Empire Strikes Back setting the bar pretty high. 'Fire' does a good job setting up where the series will go, the third book broken up into two separate features scheduled for 2014 and 2015. Almost across the board, we learn a lot more about all the characters, the disintegrating situation in Panem. If there's a weakness, it's that at 146 minutes, 'Fire' is a little long in the tooth. The first hour is a little slow-moving in setting everything up, laying everything out with the feel of duplication. It plays a lot like the first movie, scenes repeated, situations repeated almost word-for-word. Thankfully, that's not the entire movie. Things pick up near the hour-mark for the better, the momentum picking up and never slowing down until the final credits.

What is never in question -- and wasn't an issue in the first one -- is casting Jennifer Lawrence in the lead role here as Katniss Everdeen, a teenager living in Panem's District 12, the poorest of the districts. Coming off her Oscar-award winning performance from Silver Linings Playbook, Lawrence adds to the development of Katniss, and for the better in a big way. She may be a teenager in years but in experience, she's a grown woman, questioning everything about what her life has become. Lawrence's Katniss still struggles with the spotlight, not understanding why she's being glorified for killing and surviving where so many others died. Her Katniss has become a hero, a beacon of the rebellion, a hope for something better, something she is quickly figuring out. Whether it be on-screen or just doing promotional interviews, Lawrence has a very natural, likable side, and she proves again why she was such an ideal casting choice to play Katniss.

All the other key players return as well, and with some new additions. I liked Peeta's development, Hutcherson capitalizing on a script that allows him something to do other than whine and look dreamily into Katniss' eyes. Sutherland too is spot-on, brimming with menacing intensity and trying to hold onto a tenuous grasp of his country. Also returning are Woody Harrelson as Haymitch, the former District 12 winner and booze-addled mentor to Katniss and Peeta, Elizabeth Banks as Effie, the group's agent of sorts, promoting them while growing close to each, Lenny Kravitz as Cinna, their stylist and Katniss' confidant, Stanley Tucci as Caesar Flickerman, the TV host of the televised Hunger Games, Toby Jones his partner. With so many characters, it'd be easy for some to get lost in the shuffle, but that's not the case here. Each supporting character gets his moment to shine, Harrelson and Banks taking Haymitch and Effie forward, Kravitz doing a fine job as Cinna, and Tucci is ever the scene-stealer as Caesar, able to produce a laugh or a harsher, more emotional moment almost at will.

Where 'Fire' hits its groove is near the hour-mark, and here come the SPOILERS. In hopes of squashing the symbol Katniss has become, President Snow has a twist in mind for the 75th Hunger Games, the Third Quarter Quell. The competitors will be two winners apiece from each District, Katniss and Peeta forced back into the arena, this time created by Game Master Plutarch Heavensbee (Philip Seymour Hoffman). The setting looks like the South Pacific, a jungle-covered island with a lagoon in the middle, but there's countless twists and threats awaiting the competitors as they see who will be the last fighter standing. Much like the first movie, 'Fire' is at its strongest during the actual Hunger Games. There's something primal, exhilarating, profoundly dark and exciting about these sequences. As a bonus, we get to know more about the other Tributes -- far more than the original -- including Sam Claflin as Finnick, the ego-driven District 4 hero, Jena Malone as Johanna, the vicious, cynical fighter who isn't interested in public opinion, and Jeffrey Wright as Beetee, the squirrelly mechanical and engineering specialist.

Sure, there are weaknesses along the way, especially the sometimes sluggish first hour. Taken as a whole, it's a more than worthy follow-up in the series. If it's not the end-all, be-all second entry in the trilogy, it's still very good and more than lives up to the groundwork Collins set up with her second novel. The ending especially works, doing a great job ending on a cliffhanger that should propel the series right into the final two movies. What else to look for? Liam Hemsworth as Gale, Katniss' quasi-boyfriend, and Willow Shields as Primrose, Katniss' younger sister, growing up at the most turbulent of times and maturing just as fast. And this time around, I noticed James Newton Howard's musical score far more, a worthy addition to the trilogy.

Where does this one stand? Fans of the series -- the books or the first film -- will no doubt enjoy this one. I liked it a lot, even loved the second half. I resent the three books being split into four movies, but like the rest of you jamokes, I'll be there when it hits theaters. 'Fire' does a very nice job setting things up, and I'm psyched for where things are going.

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013): ***/****

Silver Linings Playbook

Each movie awards season, some movies gain crazy amounts of momentum. Little films turn into BIG films thanks to some critical buzz, others because of word of mouth. Too put it lightly, I can be a little wary of these films, especially when everyone is shoving it down your throats. Case in point, 2012's Silver Linings Playbook. I needn't have worried. I liked it....a lot.

After an eight month stay at a mental institution, Pat Solitano Jr. (Bradley Cooper) is finally released and moves back in with his parents, Pat Sr. (Robert De Niro) and Dolores (Jacki Weaver), at their home in Philadelphia. The incident that put him in the institution still hangs over Pat though, and though he's trying his best, he's struggling to adjust. His parents have their own issues going on while Pat tries his best to get back together with his wife, proving he's changed. It doesn't go particularly well until he meets Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence), a young widow who struggled with sex addiction following her husband's tragic death. Tiffany offers a solution though; she'll help Pat get back together with Nikki if he helps her in an amateur dance competition that requires a partner. He bristles at first but decides to go along. Maybe these two can end up helping each other.

One of the most talented directors currently working, David O. Russell delivers a gem here. He earned a Best Director nod, ultimately losing to Ang Lee for Life of Pi. While it is a drama, it has some very funny moments. It isn't a drama or comedy, refusing to be hamstrung by either genre description, and it's the better for it. The drama, laughs and emotions come from the personal reality of the story. While the amateur dance competition seems a little out of left field, it isn't an issue. It fits in with the story effortlessly. 'Playbook' also deftly handles a story that focuses so heavily on mental health issues. Pat, Tiffany and others struggle with depression, addictions and other assorted things that can't be seen like a disease or a sickness. There aren't easily seen symptoms, but the diseases are very, very real. It's a human drama, and a good one.

An awards season darling, 'Playbook' didn't catch all that buzz because of any huge style, crazy cinematography or groundbreaking new storytelling technique. Plain and simple, it's the acting with a nomination for each of the Best Acting categories. Cooper and Lawrence aren't close age-wise at all, Cooper 37 and Lawrence 21 at the time of filming, but the age difference isn't an issue in the least. Talk about chemistry, it's pretty perfect every time they have a scene together. They drive each other nuts but can't quite get away each other. Cooper does a fine job showing a pissed off frustration at the world while still being sympathetic. Lawrence was the lone Oscar winner, taking the Best Actress award, and she deserves it. There are moments where her armor is up, protecting herself, but revealing her worries and concerns in these horrifically dramatic moments that are difficult to watch. Very likable actors in just about every part they do, and as the hearts of the film here, they don't disappoint.

Also earning supporting nominations were De Niro and Weaver. Of the two, I was more impressed with De Niro, his Pat Sr. an epic Philadelphia Eagles fan who lives on superstitions and luck, struggling with his own past demons and current issues while trying to help out his son. He has a scene late that's perfect with Lawrence, a confrontation that gets defused in a great back-and-forth. Weaver's role is more familiar but still worth watching, a mother who worries and worries about everyone around her. In some other key supporting parts look for a subdued Chris Tucker as Pat's friend from the institution, Anupam Kher as Dr. Cliff, Pat's psychiatrist, John Ortiz as Ronnie, a friend of Pat's who's married to Nikki's nagging sister (Julia Stiles), and Shea Whigham as Jake, Pat's older brother who doesn't know how to deal with his brother's mental health issues.

I liked the movie throughout, but I wasn't sure early on exactly where it was heading. It's never slow, but an episodic story that runs 122 minutes does cover a lot of ground. I never thought I would write this in a review, but the story really comes together as the amateur dance competition and the training for it steps to the forefront. Go figure. All the different personal issues come together in a scene that could have gone poorly if handled a little differently. It's high on emotion -- maybe a little too much -- but like so much else here, it works. Maybe it shouldn't, but it does. The dance competition ends up being a great scene and a fitting finale. I'm not one who is typically in favor of a movie having a happy ending, but this is one where it is required/necessary. Great ending to a really good movie with a handful of worthwhile acting performances.

Silver Linings Playbook (2012): *** 1/2 /****

The Hunger Games

As far as popular book series go, The Hunger Games trilogy by author Suzanne Collins is the only one I've fallen for. That sounds negative, I just liked them...so there. Harry Potter, Twilight, Percy Jackson, any number of others, I never had a whole lot of interest in them. With 'THG,' I don't know if it was the characters, the future dystopia, the unique setting, but I loved the books and raced through all three in a little over a week before the first movie was released March 23rd. Where so many other book-to-novel transitions suffer, 2012's The Hunger Games isn't one of them.

It's sometime in the near future, and North America has ceased to exist. Instead, a government and country Panem have taken over, the country divided into 12 districts ruled with an iron fist. It has been some 80-odd years since a revolution took place, the people revolting against their rulers. The government that took control in the aftermath has installed a brutal system of rule with a yearly tribute meant to keep the population in check. It is called the Hunger Games, and once a year, a boy and a girl aged 12-18 from each district is picked at random and thrown into an arena where they will fight to the death. It is a televised event, all the population forced to watch.

In one of those districts -- District 12, looks like Appalachia -- lives 16-year old Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence), who cares for her younger sister, Prim (Willow Shields), and her mother who still struggles with the death of her husband in a mining accident. Katniss is the sole provider for her family and tries to calm Prim as they prepare for the Reaping, the yearly event where the 2 district "tributes" are picked for the Hunger Games. At the ceremony, Prim is selected but Katniss desperately volunteers to go in her place. With the male district tribute, a baker's son, Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson), Katniss is whisked off to the Capitol City where she is prepared and trained for the Hunger Games and all its brutality. She can be told anything she wants, but nothing can truly prepare her for what awaits in the arena where 23 will die and only one will survive.

With many book-to-film transitions, my typical goal/objective is for the film to just not ruin the book(s) I've enjoyed so much. With Collins helping write the script, director Gary Ross passes with flying colors. 'Hunger' stays true to the book, the characters and the story. Any omissions don't hurt the movie, and any creative license goes with the flow of the book and movie. As for the future society, it gets things right. We're left in the dark as to the exact details, only seeing this totalitarian society rise up in the place of what we did know. The rich population in the Capitol are lavish, extravagant and favor heavy make-up and showy clothes. The outlying districts are just trying to survive, make it to the next day. It's still a world that feels familiar, but it is tweaked just enough to keep things interesting in all its despicable brutality.

Reading the books, I knew that Jennifer Lawrence had been cast as heroine Katniss so that definitely helped. I had a picture of what the character looked like in my head. No doubt this movie will sink or swim on how the individual viewers feel about her because she's in about 98% of the movie. This is an example of perfect casting...perfect. The sign of good acting is that you don't feel like you're watching someone act. Lawrence -- just 21 years old -- is an incredibly gifted young talent. Natural doesn't begin to describe her. It seems almost effortless with her. She's fought for everything she has in her life, and now she intends to protect her family no matter what. Having hunted and navigated the woods for years, she doesn't realize it, but she's perfectly suited to survive the Games. Good for her, not so much when her rival tributes see how talented she is. Lawrence makes Katniss a human being, not a character, just a teenage girl who's naive, strong, innocent and dead-set on protecting those she loves.

As for the rest of the cast, it's just gravy that they're uniformly and equally as well-cast, both the villains and heroes. Hutcherson has a good, easy-going chemistry with Lawrence, and his Peete has a secret that could help or hurt their chances at survival. Liam Hemsworth plays Gale, Katniss' long-time friend, the two teenagers realizing how special the other is to them only when death is on the line. The Gale character is developed considerably more in books 2 and 3. Rock star and musician Lenny Kravitz is an interesting choice (but a good one) to play Cinna, Katniss' stylist meant to build up an image of her for the viewers. Stanley Tucci is a scene-stealer as Caesar Flickerman, the amiable host of the televised Hunger Games, Toby Jones as his on-air co-host. Woody Harrelson is equally good as Haymitch, the District 12 mentor, a previous winner who teaches his new tributes with each passing year. Elizabeth Banks is surprisingly funny as the clueless Effie, the District 12 representative and guide for the tributes. As for the Capitol villains, there's Donald Sutherland as sinister President Snow and Wes Bentley as Seneca Crane, the constructor of the Hunger Games arena.

The 142-minute movie is basically dived into two portions; the intro in District 12 and the Capitol, all of it building that sense of doom that leads into the second half, the actual Hunger Games (the 74th running of the event). There are no real weak or slow points in the story, but the momentum certainly picks up once Katniss is thrown into the arena with the 23 other tributes. The intro to the arena is a high-point, each tribute on a pedestal waiting for a clock to wind down. Once it runs out, it's a free for all, some running, others running toward the supplies placed in front of them. 'Hunger' earns it's PG-13 rating, but it could have been a hard R easily. The games are almost entirely shown through Katniss' eyes, a personal, adrenaline-pumping, terrifying experience of a blood-soaked sporting event. There are some secrets in store, and the tributes never know what will be thrown at them. Credit also to composer James Newton Howard's score, memorable without being overbearing. We really only get to meet two other tributes, young Rue (Amandla Stenberg), and vicious Cato (Alexander Ludwig), the others mostly known as their district number and little else.

What I came away most impressed with was that Collins' first book in the trilogy, The Hunger Games, throws a lot at the reader. A transition to the big screen seemed daunting. A mysterious and vague -- but hinted at -- past, a long list of characters who were all interesting in their own right, and a futuristic world that seems familiar to what we know, but at the same time is vastly different. The movie doesn't just pick and choose what to do, instead it does an admirable job of making that transition. A lot of that can be chalked up to Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss, a star-making role if there ever was one. An incredibly worthy start to a highly successful franchise. Looking forward to what the next movies have to offer.

The Hunger Games <---trailer (2012): *** 1/2 /****

X-Men: First Class

Growing up watching Saturday morning cartoons, I was more of a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles man than anything else. How about that for a random lead that has nothing to do with movies? All other shows/cartoons/series took a backseat to the Turtles, including the X-Men. I knew the characters, the basic story, and without seeing an episode or reading a comic book thought that Wolverine was badass. So now as a 26 year old, I'm catching up a bit with the Marvel series, including this summer's prequel, 2011's X-Men: First Class.

From Marvel master Stan Lee, this is another in a growing line of quality movies that aren't just Superhero movies. It reminded me some of Captain America (set in WWII) in that it is based during the 1960s and the Cuban Missile Crisis, taking history as we know it and putting a little tweak on it. The formula in general for a "smart" superhero movie seems simple, and director Matthew Vaughn follows it well. Get good actors, not just movie stars, throw in some great action, cool characters, and a legitimately good, well-written story, and mix. You can't go wrong.

Since they were young children growing up in World War II, Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and Erik Lehnsherr (Michael Fassbender) have always been different, possessing unique abilities that no 'normal' human should possess. It's now 1962, and the FBI, including Agent MacTaggert (Rose Byrne), are recruiting these mutants from around the world. They all have abilities that when harnessed can be powerful weapons, and they're needed now more than ever. One mutant, Sebastian Shaw (Kevin Bacon), and Erik's former trainer/mentor, is attempting to pit the United States against Russia, starting World War III, a nuclear conflict that could destroy the world. Recruiting fellow mutants from around the world, Xavier and Erik prepare to stop Shaw no matter the cost. 

Well-written script, extremely talented actors and actresses, and a genuinely unique, interesting story. It really sounds too simple. Why can't more movies be like this? There isn't anything groundbreaking here, but that's not a bad thing. All a movie has to do to be moderately successful -- in my eyes at least -- is try to entertain. 'Class' certainly executes there. It is a polished action movie, but one that doesn't sacrifice story or character development for mindless explosions. Maybe a little long at 131 minutes, and composer Henry Jackman's score can be a little bit too epic at times, but this is what you want in a movie. Well-made and professional, entertaining from the word go to the end credits. As a finale, the X-Men in the Cuban Missile Crisis is one of the most insanely original ideas ever, especially Erik/Magneto manipulating a huge nuclear payload headed right at the mutants.

The heart of the movie and story is these mutants trying to decide whether to embrace good or bad. Because they're not "normal," the mutants are looked at funny, judged and ostracized by the supposedly normal people. This is shown best through McAvoy's Xavier, a learned professor and a bit of an idealist, with Fassbender's Erik, a survivor of the Holocaust looking for revenge on the men who killed his parents. It's clear from the start that these two men will be friends, albeit ones who see the world different and will eventually come to a conflict about it. Embrace the good and its pressures or lean toward the bad? Yes, it's Star Wars and the Dark Side and all that good stuff. It's great to see McAvoy and Fassbender in roles like this, two of the most talented young actors currently working in movies. They have a great chemistry together through good and bad, hopefully something any further X-Men movies will explore. Fassbender especially shines as Erik, torn apart inside by his personal and past demons.

What's cool about the X-Men is what's cool about all superheroes. Their powers are typically things as comic book nerds, little kids, a person with imagination, we've thought about it. Xavier can read minds, communicate through thoughts with others, even control their actions. Erik -- later Magneto -- can shift immense shapes, twisting metal and all sorts of shapes and sizes with his mind. Some of the other recruited X-Men include Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence), able to take different human forms, all of them hiding her own blue skin and red hair, Beast (Nicholas Hoult), a brilliant mind with extraordinary strength and physical ability, Banshee (Caleb Landry Jones), able to manipulate space with a shrill, speed of sound piercing yell, and Havok (Lucas Till), ready and willing to release pointed, explosive amounts of heat, and that's just the good guys. Along with Shaw's energy absorption -- it's cooler than it sounds -- there's Azazel (Jason Flemying), a Devil-like teleporter, Riptide (Alex Gonzales), able to create immense tornado-like explosions, and Angel (Zoe Kravitz), a young winged-woman.

As a fan of huge casts full of all star names and rising stars, that's the fun of watching a movie like this. McAvoy and Fassbender are unlikely leads without the star power recognition, but they're perfectly cast. Kevin Bacon as a super villain? Who thought of that one? But it works. January Jones is underused as the icy Emma Frost, able to use telepathy like Xavier, and even Oliver Platt makes an appearance as the Man in Black, a CIA officer working with Xavier. Of the other parts already mentioned, Lawrence is a bright spot and looks to be destined for bigger things. Hoult too is very good as Henry, later transforming into Beast. There isn't a weak spot around. If anything there's too many characters. You want more information on all of them, especially the villains. Definitely a good thing though when you want more of a movie.

Well, you can call me an X-Men fan now. This movie sold me on it. I look forward to any future prequels that set up the franchise, and the ending here is a perfect cliffhanger. It's just good old-fashioned entertainment, and I loved it. Also, watch for brief cameos by Hugh Jackman as Wolverine -- truly a funny scene with some shock value -- and Rebecca Romijn as an older Mystique.

X-Men: First Class <---trailer (2011): *** 1/2 /****