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): ***/****

Slow West

I started a new job in April and just haven't had as much free time as I used to. Meaning? I haven't gotten to watch as many movies as I'd like. So now, when I do grab a couple hours here and there, I find myself revisiting westerns I've seen, my favorite genre that always puts me at ease (basically no matter the quality). I was psyched when I saw a new western was available to watch, one that earned uniformly positive reviews. Here's 2015's Slow West.

It's the 1870s and a teenage Scottish boy, Jay Cavendish (Kodi Smit-McPhee), is traveling across the American west on a mission. He's searching and on the trail of the girl he loves, a girl a few years older than Jay named Rose (Caren Pistorious), who had to flee Scotland and is now on the run with her father. To say the least, Jay is inexperienced in surviving in the wilderness, and he has no real idea of where he's going, only that he'll keep on looking for Rose -- the love of his life -- for as long as it takes. It is on the trail though he meets Silas Selleck (Michael Fassbender), an experienced bounty hunter who offers to be Jay's guide...for a price. Suspicious but desperate, Jay agrees so both he and Silas ride west, following what little evidence the Scottish teenager has. The trail behind him has been rough enough, but he has little idea of what awaits.

Though it pains me to say it, I can admit the truth. It's something I've known for years, but man, it does suck. The western genre has gone the way of the dodo bird. The big, extravagant, epic westerns of the 1950's and 1960's are long gone, as are the bigger than life stars like John Wayne, Clint Eastwood, Jimmy Stewart, Randolph Scott and so many others. What are we left with? The occasional western that gets a big theatrical release, but more likely, a smaller, indie western like this 2015 effort from director John McLean. Small scale, almost minimalist at times, and most definitely in revisionist mode, it's an interesting movie but not one I necessarily enjoyed unfortunately.

The late 1960's started the trend, and the 1970's kicked the door in with the concept of revisionist westerns. These were movies that tried to look at the American wild west with a more honest, brutal, graphic and dirty vision. There were some great westerns released, but often times, the finished product was so bleak, no one wanted to see any more westerns. 'Slow' is in the revisionist vein 100 percent. The portrayal of the wild west in the 1870's is violent, startling, survival-based and any one who gets in your way....you've a right to kill them. Bbbbbut, my goodness it is bleak to the point it is hard to just sit and appreciate the movie that definitely had a ton of potential. It clocks in at just 85 minutes and is painfully drawn out at times (taking its title incredibly seriously) with very little actually happening. That becomes a bit of an issue.

The positive is obvious. His name is Michael Fassbender. Maybe you've heard of him. One of the most talented actors working currently in film, Fassbender's Silas is a presence that's both comforting and intimidating at the same time. He's looking out for Jay (for a price), but with something else in mind too. Fascinating to watch an extremely talented actor do his thing, and his scenes with Smit-McPhee are excellent as they find a rhythm, almost an unlikely friendship but not quite. The 85-minute running time comes into play there. I never really felt like I knew much about either character. Therefore when things get sticky and the bullets start flying, I didn't have much in the way of an emotional investment. Interesting performances, but I would have liked some more depth to the script.

The only other recognizable face -- who's quickly becoming one of my favorites -- is Ben Mendelsohn as Payne, an outlaw and leader of a gang who has some history with Silas. The physical appearance here is amazingly perfect for Mendelsohn, a wide-brimmed hat and an IMMENSE coat made of buffalo to the point you can barely make out his face. Now that said...he's in about three scenes and is criminally underused to the point it feels like a waste. His presence alone, his cold glare often says more than any line of dialogue could. Along with Pistorious as Rose, also look for Edwin Wright, Andrew Robertt and Rory McCann in small but important supporting parts.

Something is missing though. The on-location shooting in New Zealand is stunningly good-looking. One shot after another could be freeze-framed and hung on a wall like a painting. The mostly low-key musical score isn't too folksy and one main theme resonates throughout the story. Even the message in general of a brutal, bullet-riddled American west is strong....but it doesn't make the movie good as much as it pains me to say it. The ending packs quite a wallop, or should have, but I had checked out already. A disappointing misfire unfortunately, a western with a ton of potential that spends too much time on style and its revisionist roots over characters and developing characters.

Very disappointing unfortunately.

Slow West (2015): **/****

The Counselor

I have a love-hate relationship with author Cormac McCarthy. The highly respected author can flat out write, sometimes too well. His novels are very, VERY literary to the point I struggle to find a rhythm and even enjoy the stories. I'm a little late to the party, but McCarthy bypassed the novel and went right to the screenplay with his first such work, 2013's The Counselor. The reviews are mostly mixed to negative. Where did I fall?

A defense lawyer with a solid reputation but addressed only as 'Counselor' (Michael Fassbender) is joining the riskiest of business ventures against his better judgment. He has become involved with a business partner, Reiner (Javier Bardem), who he hopes to open a nightclub with but that's the far cleaner option. Dealing with some serious money issues, Counselor has gone in on a drug deal involving over 600 kilos of cocaine being transported, the end payday being potentially $20 million. The money is quite the incentive, but is the extreme risk even remotely worth it? The money is just too much to pass on even considering the risk, but even this talented, confident lawyer doesn't know what he's got into with the drug cartel involved. Bottom line is money, and anything that gets in the way is simply collateral damage.

I've read five McCarthy novels; No Country for Old Men, Blood Meridian, The Road, The Crossing and All the Pretty Horses. McCarthy is a bleak writer. These aren't stories of hope or faith or anything positive. They revolve around death, murder, and generally, a sense that the world is always nearing some sort of apocalypse, an end day. McCarthy is an extremely talented writer, no doubt about it. His books though, they can be difficult to get through because he is so talented. That bleakness, that readable difficulty, it is both positive and negative. I really have to be in the right frame of mind to read a McCarthy novel. If you finish it, you feel like you've truly accomplished something.

So how about McCarthy tackling a screenplay without the middle man of a published novel? That's 'Counselor.' The basic story of an outsider getting involved in a drug cartel is nothing new in films, TV and literature, but McCarthy does manage to put his own unique spin on it. There is NO hope in this world, only greed, death, betrayal and regret. 'Counselor' currently has a 34% rating at Rotten Tomatoes and a 5.4 at IMDB so it obviously didn't sit too well with viewers. I liked it -- as much as you're supposed to like a movie like this -- but my goodness, there are some amazingly obvious flaws. In its bleakness, it tries ridiculously hard in heavy-handed fashion to get that message across. We encounter one stilted, heavy conversation after another about death and life and evil and decent rights and horrific wrongs. In doses, these things work. But one after another? An already heavy, at times tedious story gets even heavier, even darker to the point it can be exhausting.

You know what I've forgotten by this fifth paragraph? 'Counselor' is directed by a talented director, Ridley Scott, who talented actors and actresses seemingly want to work with. Go figure. It's a great cast here, but the characters feel almost like cardboard cutouts. They're interesting because the cast goes for it -- sometimes too much -- but at no point does it feel like any of these people are real. Fassbender does an excellent job in the titular role, but that script, it pretentiously calls him 'Counselor' without ever giving him a real name. Yeah, heavy-handed literary devices! I was worried Bardem would ham it up too much as Reiner, but his part was fascinating just because of what drives the character, and that would be excess. Their scenes together are excellent as are Brad Pitt's scenes with Fassbender. Pitt plays Westray, the Counselor's middleman of sorts who continues to recommend his new partner bail and run before he's too deep into the deal.

Not that the fellas escape unscathed, but the female cast members are done no favor. Ripped straight out of a 1940s film noir and then injected with oozing sex and a general over the top quality, Cameron Diaz plays Malkina, Reiner's seemingly unhinged girlfriend. It's a scream watching Reiner's flashback about a sexual encounter they had in his car. Diaz commits, but the part feels overdone. Penelope Cruz on the other hand is the female goddess, there to represent beauty and love and all that good stuff. Her Laura character is the Counselor's girlfriend (and later fiance), mostly there as something that can be used against our intrepid lawyer should anything go wrong.

Without giving anything away in terms of character and some twists along the way, also look for Rosie Perez, Ruben Blades, Edgar Ramirez, Dean Norris, John Leguizamo, Toby Kebbell, Goran Visnjic, and Bruno Ganz in parts of varying importance and screentime.

It's the rare movie that doesn't have good and bad features. On top of its impeccable cast and time-transplanted film noir plot, 'Counselor' is dripping with tension, a feeling of foreboding and sense of doom, of something horrific to come. That's especially evident in a description of a horrific device used by the drug cartels to take out troublemakers. You hear about it early and then spend the rest of the film waiting to see it in horrifying action. This is one uncomfortable movie, and that's a good thing. Definitely a positive. That doom cloud hanging over the story though, it limits what the story can do. I never felt I had a read on the Counselor (the character). I would have liked some more exposition about the characters (all of them) and the set-up. No, not everything laid out on a silver platter, but a little something. As is the case at times when I've read McCarthy novels, it feels like he's trying to be the most literary person ever. That unfortunately is the feeling here.

Here we sit. Not a classic but not the complete dud so many made it out to be. Sometimes 'Counselor' gets too wrapped up in the sex and violence, but the guts of it is a disturbingly dark story that doesn't pull any punches. Know what you're getting into, but yikes, it is an interesting film experience for good and bad.

The Counselor (2013): ** 1/2 /**** 

12 Years a Slave

Just a year ago or so in theaters, Quentin Tarantino's Django Unchained was a huge hit with audiences and critics alike, making over $425 million. It was a story about a pre-Civil War slavery that was horrific and over the top, almost cartoonish in its portrayal of slavery. An interesting companion piece because it tackles the same historical issue in far darker, far more somber fashion, 2013's 12 Years a Slave.

It's 1841 in Saratoga, New York, and Solomon Northup (Chiwetel Ejiofor) is a free black man. He works as a carpenter, is also a skilled musician and lives comfortably with his wife and two young children. When his family goes away on a quick work/vacation, Solomon is approached by two musicians who offer him a two-week job working with their traveling circus performers. Solomon is intrigued by their offer, dining and drinking with them one evening. He wakes up the next morning in chains, realizing he was drugged the night before. Solomon has been kidnapped and will be shipped south to be sold as a slave in the deep south. Listening to other kidnap victims in the same situation, some runaway slaves, he learns he's in more of a spot than he thought. If he tries to convince anyone of his plight, they'll punish him (with the possibility of whipping) if not kill him. Can he survive? Can Solomon find a way to endure and somehow gain back his freedom?

Wow. What a movie, one of the most uncomfortable experiences I've had watching a film in years. Technically speaking, it's excellent, but this next part might sound obvious. Anyone who knows their history -- or even those who don't -- realize that slavery existed in the U.S. less than 200 years ago in the 1860s. It's a known thing, but knowing and seeing the horrors are different. It is a terrifyingly uncomfortable movie, and it's supposed to be. It pulls no punches in telling the true story of Solomon Northup, director Steve McQueen (not that one) at the helm of a movie that won Best Picture, Best Supporting Actress and Best Adapted Screenplay at the Oscars. Be forewarned heading in. This is a film, not a popcorn movie that you come away with with a smile on your face. '12' is a film to watch and appreciate for what it is. A true story from one of the darker periods in American history. I won't be revisiting this one anytime soon. Once was enough.

Chiwetel Ejiofor or Matthew McConaughey? Which actor for the Best Actor Oscar? Having seen both '12' and Dallas Buyers Club, it's fair to say that either man deserved the win. It's a push, both performances worthwhile in their own respect. For Ejiofor, this is a great performance and hopefully one that propels him into stardom. I've always thought he was a solid actor with some poor choices in films (2012, Four Brothers), but this film shows his ability. Playing Solomon Northup, this is an emotionally draining, physical, very expressive part. Ejiofor allows the rest of the cast to chew scenery at times, letting a quick, hard-hitting diatribe here and there fill in the blanks. He does so much with a look here, his tired eyes telling the story. Dubbed Platt (the name of a runaway slave from Georgia), Solomon tries to survive however he can, almost willing himself to keep on and return to his family. This is a human, visceral performance. Unbelievable stuff.

In a part that won her the Best Supporting Actress Oscar, Lupita Nyong'o delivers a gem as Patsey, a young slave who's hard-working, does her job and puts her head down, unfortunately becoming a favorite of the plantation owner, Epps, played to evil perfection by Michael Fassbender (nominated for his part, didn't win). Nyong'o is strong across the board but won the Oscar with one key, emotional gut-wrenching scene late. A great supporting performance. Fassbender (a favorite of mine) is intensity personified, a vile slave owner who quotes the Bible at all times, making his slaves do odd, bizarre things to suit his random wants and desires, Sarah Paulson playing his equally unhinged wife. Some other key supporting parts include Benedict Cumberbatch as Ford, a decent slave owner but still a slave owner, Paul Giamatti as a bottom-line slave dealer, Paul Dano as an angry, clueless overseer, Alfre Woodard as a slave woman turned mistress, Garret Dillahunt as Armsby, a hopeful overseer, and Scoot McNairy and Taran Killam as the men who kidnap Solomon.

As I mentioned, this was a difficult movie to sit through. It's not boring, the subject matter just hard to watch. '12' is 134 minutes long and does drag at times. The story isn't the most pointed thing, drifting along at times. My biggest issue is that there is no sense of time having passed. I kept waiting for a title card or something to pop up on-screen and say '8 Years Later.' There's no way to tell how much time has passed. Has it been weeks or months? Has it been years? The incidents are horrific, the truth of the story hard to fathom, but then out of nowhere there's a solution to it all. That was my biggest issue with '12,' no idea of the time that's passed. It sounds simple and something minor to complain about, but it's a legit issue.

This is a difficult movie to watch, plain and simple. I do like where it heads in the last third or so, Brad Pitt making a memorable appearance as a Canadian carpenter working in the south who meets Solomon while working on Epps' plantation. We get several scenes analyzing the horror and truth of slavery that come across as slightly heavy-handed, but that said, I guess there's very little subtle about slavery itself. The ending is heartbreaking in itself, especially the title cards that play out before the credits. Also worth mentioning is Hans Zimmer's score, almost minimalist in its execution, a simple, soft, trance-like theme resonating the most. Listen HERE. An interesting movie, one you're not necessarily going to like, but one you'll be able to appreciate and experience.

12 Years a Slave (2013): ***/****

Centurion

I like nothing more than a good historical epic, especially ones from a turbulent time in world history, the Roman Empire. The stories of Roman soldiers conquering the world one battle after another lends well to the big screen, especially stories of the fighting in Britannia with films like King Arthur, The Eagle, The Last Legion, and 2010's Centurion.

Stationed at a remote Roman garrison in Britannia, Quintus Dias (Michael Fassbender) is the lone survivor of a vicious Picts attack and taken prisoner. Brutally beaten, Quintus manages to escape and is rescued by the nearby Ninth Legion, commanded by General Titus Virilus (Dominic West). The Ninth has been tasked with wiping out the warring Picts, but instead, they become the target. Betrayed by their mute scout, Etain (Olga Kurylenko), the Ninth is almost completely annihilated. Virilus is captured while Quintus is one of the few survivors. Trapped far into enemy territory, Quintus and a group of just six survivors must find a way to get back to safety at the nearest Roman garrison. As they race for help though, Etain is not far behind with a squad of Pict warriors ready to kill all of them.

Okay, here goes. Medieval times were all sorts of nasty, especially when it comes to violence. Swords, knives, all sorts of blades and blunt instruments, those weapons will do plenty of damage to the human body. Directing this Roman Empire epic (and writing too), Neil Marshall plays up the violence quota. The problem is that in its epic graphic quality, it comes across as cartoonish. It's in the vein of 300, but without that graphic novel quality. The blood splatter looks ridiculous, and the violence becomes tedious almost immediately. How many times can you see a knife/sword/arrow impale itself in someone's face/eye/throat before it becomes numbingly painful to watch? It took me one fight scene when a Roman soldier takes a spear to the crotch. Oh, by the way, that gimmick is used again later. Making it worse, the editing is so quick that it becomes a blur of bloody, indecipherable body parts being hacked away.

So snowballing off the violence angle, the issue comes from the pacing in an already pretty brisk 97-minutes running time. In the first 50 minutes, Quintus is caught, beaten, escapes, joins the Ninth, watches the Ninth get annihilated, and then runs for his life with the six other survivors. The frenetic pacing is insanely uninteresting as we see repetitious shots of the seven -- strung out in a single-file line -- sprinting across the Britannic landscape to composer Ilan Eshkeri's booming, dramatic score. Cut to Etain and her warriors prodding their horses on fast in pursuit. A survivalist story set in the 2nd Century Roman times should be interesting, but it isn't. Thankfully, the story slows down a bit in the second and figures out a better way to go as Quintus and his dwindling survivors meet Arianne (Imogen Poots), a young Britannic woman banished from a Pict village now living in the woods. The finale especially works, delivering some surprising twists and a worthwhile final scene that plays on Quintus' earlier narration.

I wish I liked this movie more. The basic premise of the story is ripe with potential. Think The Lost Patrol meets Gladitator meets The Magnificent Seven. Providing the narration, Fassbender delivers a fine lead performance. He's the Everyman, a common soldier thrust into an unlikely heroic position. A rising star, it's another strong part for Fassbender. Quintus' survivors include Bothos (David Morrisey), the Roman officer, Thax (J.J. Feild), the me-first troublemaker, Brick (Liam Cunningham), the veteran on his last campaign, Macros (Noel Clarke), the African fighting with the Romans, Leonidas (Dimitri Leonidas), the Greek refugee who joined the Legions, and Tarak (Riz Ahmed), the knife-wielding cook. Lots of different backgrounds, and some very cool characters, but they're not given enough to do. Surprise, surprise, when they start getting picked off by the Picts, it's far from emotionally or dramatic moments.

As for the villains, there's good and bad. Kurylenko as the mute Britannic tracker, Etain, is a gem. With war paint covering her face and hair standing on end with all sorts of flowing robes and animal furs, she's a vision of anger and violence, providing quite the counterpart to the Roman survivors. Her one-on-one fight scene with West's General Virilus is a gem too. The Pict leader, Gorlacon (Ulrich Thomsen), is just the opposite. He's not imposing or intimidating and basically disappears halfway through the movie. So overall, I can't completely rip the movie, but I can't completely recommend it either. Instead, it falls somewhere in between unfortunately.

Centurion (2010): ** 1/2 /****

Prometheus

With moves like 1979's Alien and 1982's Blade Runner, director Ridley Scott created two of the most well-known, well-respected, and popular science fiction movies of the last 30-plus years, and seemingly was on the road to becoming a sci-fi master. To be fair, with those two movies alone, he is a sci-fi master. He hadn't returned to science fiction until the recent release, 2012's Prometheus, a prequel to Alien. Worth the wait? Flawed overall, but an epic success when it does work.

It is the year 2089 and two scientists, Dr. Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace) and Dr. Charlie Holloway (Logan Marshall-Green), have made a series of discoveries -- cave paintings from different places and eras in human history -- that all have a common link. They all contain a drawing of some sort of being pointing to the same galactic location. Some two years later onboard the spaceship Prometheus, Shaw and Holloway are part of an expedition traveling to the darkest corners of the universe in search of what those paintings might mean. Is there intelligent life out there? Did they create us as a race? After the two-year journey, Prometheus arrives at the moon LV-223 to continue the investigation. They find evidence of another race but something else as well. What did this race create?

Some film directors just have credibility at the very mention of their name, and Ridley Scott is one of those few. When this movie is good, it is great. I didn't see it in 3-D, but the look of the movie is incredible, especially a mysterious opening sequence...but more on that later. The musical score is kept to a minimum, but when it's used, it makes quite an impression (kudos to composer Marc Streitenfeld). Like the most effective science fiction stories and movies, it succeeds because it makes you think, makes you question. What better place to do that than the far reaches of the universe? Anything could exist out there, friendly or aggressive. Were we put on Earth for a reason? Does faith mean anything? Do your beliefs truly mean something to you? When you're in a spot, how do you react? At its best, Scott's film explores some of these issues. Oh, he also does a fair job trying to scare the hell out of you as a viewer.

It's been years since I've seen the Alien movies, but as a prequel, it has a distinctly different feel. The visual is stunning here. Yes, it's a science fiction movie that degenerates into a creature feature (unfortunately), but it can also fairly and accurately be described as an artsy, minimalist take on mankind, space travel, the future and so much more. Basically the exact opposite of a summer blockbuster. It forces you to pay attention and think for yourself. It isn't always an easy movie to follow, but for the most part you're rewarded in the end. Nothing is ever really spelled out for you. That can be both rewarding and frustrating, especially in the finale. It is different though, and Scott tries for something more than the norm.

An effective, solid ensemble cast steps to the forefront for Scott's prequel, starting with Rapace and Holloway as the archeologists searching for answers. Charlize Theron is brutally cold and efficient as Vickers, the Weyland Corporation representative in charge of making sure the mission goes off according to plan. Her looks can deceive you, but she's cold and calculated. Idris Elba has another scene-stealing part as Janek, the Prometheus captain (with co-pilots Emun Elliott and Benedict Wong), an everyman but highly intelligent and able to piece things together for his job and mission. Guy Pearce in heavy make-up plays Weyland, the aging, decrepit CEO who finances the deep space mission. Sean Harris and Rafe Spall have smaller but just as important parts as Fifield and Millburn, two members of the investigating team, each with their own hopes on the mission. Also look for Patrick Wilson in a one-scene part, Shaw's father in a dream sequence.

The part that no doubt most moviegoers will remember though is David, an android created by the Weyland Corp. to blend in as a human, possessing everything but a soul. David is played to perfection by rising star Michael Fassbender in a part that could/should earn him an Oscar nod. The obvious comparison is to Hal in Space Odyssey, but that's limiting and not a completely fair comparison. This android has human mannerisms and touches -- he moves like a man, rides bikes, plays basketball, mimics Peter O'Toole in Lawrence of Arabia -- but there's also that one thing, that one little thing that prevents him from being a man. It's hard to put my finger on it, but Fassbender does an incredible job. His David is sympathetic, menacing, brilliant, intimidating and conniving. Because he can be programmed, it's can be difficult to get a read on his intentions, but whatever they may be, Fassbender is the star of Prometheus without a doubt.

Certain moments in Prometheus have stuck with me since seeing it and no doubt will stick with me in the days and weeks to come. The opening sequence is a jaw-dropper; a supremely muscle-bound, albino humanoid being left on a desolate, isolated landscape (a pre-civilization Earth?) as a spaceship takes off. He takes a potion that kills him, his body decomposing in seconds. Is it the creation of mankind? Who knows for sure? The arrival at LV-223 is equally impressive, the Prometheus attempting to find a landing zone as it travels through the atmosphere and the terrain below. Stunning visual sequences, both of them. Once the crew detects some variation on life, the visual turns to the dark and unsettling, the feeling of Doomsday looming in the air.

While I will readily recommend the movie overall, I can also say I came away slightly disappointed in the end. I don't need everything wrapped up nicely with a bow, and open-ended endings aren't a movie killer for me. But as is here, the ending left me unsatisfied. I wanted more.....of something. It doesn't have to be answers spelled out for me, but there's got to be something. Here, it just ends. On the whole, I'll heartily recommend it. Know there are flaws, but the positives ended up being particularly memorable for this moviegoer. Definitely give this one a try! Also check out the great teaser trailer below. The full-length trailer (watch HERE) is also above average as trailers go.

Prometheus <---trailer (2012): ***/****

Haywire

First appearing in the public eye as a mixed martial arts fighter, Gina Carano has made the jump from athlete to actress, and the early return is nothing but positive. For her first movie, she chose a role that's right in her wheelhouse, a fastball down the middle. She made a wise decision, picking an ideal role that gets to show off her immense physical talent and ability, starring in 2012's Haywire.

Working for a private contractor who works for the government, former Marine Mallory Kane (Carano) is as good as it gets when black ops work is needed. She takes jobs on an individual basis from her boss, Kenneth (Ewan McGregor), sometimes working alone, other times working with a team. After a successful job in Barcelona though, everything hits the fan. Suddenly, Mallory has been set up and international law enforcement is after her wherever she goes. Who burned her, and what's their motive? Left on her own and abandoned in Europe, Mallory must now find out who set her up before they complete their mission.

From director Steven Soderbergh, Haywire is just more proof of the director's already visible talent. Dark comedies, crime dramas, heist movies, disaster epics, historical period pieces, Soderbergh can do it all, and he manages to put a unique, personal spin on all of them. I really liked this movie from the talented director. His familiar style is there, but it's a no-frills sort of style. Title cards keep us abreast of where Mallory has traveled to, and what better music than a fast-paced jazzy score to accompany the action? Composer David Holmes does a variation on his Ocean's 11 score, a more subtle, sinister sound. Listen to the main theme HERE. The whole soundtrack/score is surprisingly worthwhile, appropriate in a quirky sort of way. It's a small-scale spy story -- somewhat similar to the Bourne movies -- that feels familiar with a 'been there, done that' quality, but Soderbergh and his cast are so good at what they do, you don't even notice. It's too good of a movie.

Appearing in her first starring role, Carano does not disappoint as the vengeful Mallory. There are too few female action stars out there -- legitimate ones that an audience can buy -- and Carano certainly has that potential to fill the void. Basically, don't expect her to do any romantic comedies anytime soon...although that could be interesting. This isn't a part that requires her to be a big, showy performer. It's a subtle, quiet performance that relies on intensity and few words. Most importantly, Carano is incredibly believable in the part. As an athlete/MMA fighter, she's quite capable, something she gets to show off in her handful of hardcore fight scenes. She does all of her own stunts (that I could see), and also important, more than holds her own in the fight scenes. Fight sequences between a man and a woman can look forced and stagey, but not here. A welcome addition to the action genre, I look forward to seeing where Carano goes from here as an actress. Incredibly talented and one of the sexiest, seductive spies ever.

It is a testament to Soderbergh's talent and reputation that countless actors/actresses want to work with, as is the case here. Haywire features a handful of smaller performances from some not small names and not a one disappoints. McGregor gets the most screentime as Kenneth, Mallory's employer and former boyfriend/lover, and makes the most of his supporting part. Channing Tatum plays Aaron, a fellow agent/operative who's worked with Mallory in the past and is now trying to piece things together. Michael Douglas is nicely cast as Coblenz, a government higher-up who hired Kenneth for some off the books work, and Antonio Banderas is appropriately mysterious as Rodrigo, a key part of the mission and deception. In a brutally efficient part, rising star Michael Fassbender again shows he's capable of bigger and bigger things, playing Paul, an Irish source for Mallory. Bill Paxton plays John Kane, Mallory's father, who knows what his daughter is up to, constantly hoping she leaves the business.

For better or worse, some of those performances are there for Carano's Mallory to beat the crap out of. With her mixed martial arts background, Carano leads the charge in the action department. That no-frills, brutal style is reflected in these fight scenes, one with Tatum and Fassbender each, among some other quality action. These are fights that leave the viewer hurting, and Soderbergh wisely shoots it without the frenetic editing. We see the fights, see the individual moves, all of them done so quickly they're almost a blur. Even better, no music is played over these scenes, all of the focus on the brutal hand-to-hand combat. This is where Carano shines, a physical presence who can stand toe-to-toe with her male counterparts.  The sequences are so well done there's almost a dark beauty to it all, so good it makes you marvel at what's going on.

Above all else, that's what this flick is; an action movie. A chase through Barcelona, and later Mallory fleeing a SWAT team in Dublin are criminally simplistic. It isn't lots of quick cutting and crazy out of this world explosions and pyrotechnics, just one person on the run and/or chasing someone. Holmes's jazzy score plays over this portion that bounces back and forth between color and black and white photography. Stylish without being overdone, just enough to call attention to itself without being overly aggressive. The story itself is half flashback, half current time, and while they're explained, the betrayals and double crosses are almost unnecessary. From Barcelona to Dublin, upstate New York to the New Mexico desert, Haywire starts off at a sprint and never slows down at just 93 minutes. Simply put, a professionally made, beautifully choreographed espionage/spy thriller that is well worth a watch.

Haywire <---trailer (2012): ***/****

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 /****

300

Back to a topic I've written about before for this review...the anti-climactic last stand. Of course, it's only anti-climactic if you know even a little about history. So if you fit in, the endings to movies about the Alamo, the Battle of the Little Big Horn, and the Battle of Thermopylae shouldn't come as a surprise to you. But how do you make a movie where at least a good portion of the audience knows how the story is going to end? Getting there can be half the fun, but that doesn't fly with a lot of audiences.

Turning Frank Miller's graphic novel 300, based on the real life battle of Thermopylae, into a big budget action picture, director Zack Snyder stayed true to the story's roots -- in this case the graphic novel. Instead of making a historically accurate, fact-based version of this ancient battle, Snyder goes for the jugular with an over the top, very stylized telling of one of history's famous last stands. And even though the movie was a huge hit -- making over $200 million -- the criticisms rained down, but more on that later. Maybe more so than with so many other movies, it is essential to know the type of movie you will be watching when it comes to 300. If not, there's any number of places where interest may wane.

It is the year 480 BC and the Spartan king Leonidas (Gerard Butler) receives a messenger from Persia. The Persian god-king Xerxes (Rodrigo Santoro) is sweeping across the world with his massive army, swallowing up countries and armies wherever he goes building his empire. But with the war-heavy culture and upbringing of the Spartans, Leonidas isn't going to just roll over and let Xerxes take Sparta. The council won't allow the army to march out and face the army coming to destroy them so Leonidas finds a loophole of sorts. With his personal bodyguard of 300 men, he marches north to face Xerxes' army.

Leonidas plans for the battle at the pass of Thermopylae where Xerxes' numbers will be negated by the thin entryway. Occupying the pass, Leonidas and the brave 300 can hold back the charges thrown at them over and over again. But as the casualties mount on both sides, can they hold out in time for the council to agree to send the army to help them? Or like true Spartans, will they die in battle as they live up to their belief 'Never give up, never surrender.'? All other things aside, this movie is about the action. It gets to the point it's not just graphic violence anymore. At a certain point, it becomes a ballet, an odd dance of death with blood and guts flying around.

As somehow who doesn't love graphic violence in movies, even I was able to appreciate 300's action. It's heavy on the slow motion which works perfectly because it allows the viewer to see what's going on, how proficient the Spartans were with their weaponry, like this scene. And most of the last 75 minutes of the movie is action, pure and simple, as the Spartans repel charge after charge. You'd think it would get repetitive, but Snyder throws a curveball here and there to keep us interested, including this great fight scene with the Immortals. For one, the script is great, full of one-liners that out of context might sound overdone, but in the context of the movie could not have worked perfectly. Like this now-famous line which has been reused and reused since the movie's release.

Not having read Miller's graphic novel, I can't say how close the movie stays to its source in terms of dialogue. But the dialogue surprisingly enough is what boosts this action movie from average to above average. I for one would not have thought of an ancient massacre being the basis for good one-liners, but what do I know? Credit goes to the cast for committing to these lines, starting with Butler who delivers a movie-stealing performance with his growling voice as he spews out these great lines one after another. The rest of the cast includes Lena Headey as Gorgo, Leonidas' wife and queen of Sparta, Dominic West as the treacherous councilman Theron, and David Wenham, Vincent Regan and Michael Fassbender as three key Spartans.

Done completely in front of a green screen, the movie looks and feels like a graphic novel with its washed out colors (check out the ending for a good representation) which are nonetheless appealing to the eye. The whole movie is a visual treat, not just the expertly-choreographed action sequences. Everything down to the Spartans uniforms all works toward the visual aspect. It also made some people think this was possibly the gayest movie ever with 300 ripped, semi-naked warriors fighting together. Some people have a better imagination than I do I guess. As for the historical naysayers, this movie was never supposed to an accurate depiction of the battle. It's one crazy, over the top look at the battle that never pretends to be anything other than it is, an incredibly entertaining movie.

There are elements of Gladiator and Braveheart visible at times, but it would be hard not to reference those two classics in one way or another. But 300 stands on it's own with a style unto itself. And massacre be damned, Snyder finds a way to make the ending powerful, inspiring and emotional...and that's after the battle. Check it out here as David Wenham's Delios tells the story of the 300 to the Spartan council. A damn good ending to a great movie.

300 <----trailer (2006): *** 1/2 /****

Inglourious Basterds

Is there a more polarizing personality in Hollywood than Quentin Tarantino? People hate him or love him with little middle ground. He's such an eccentric guy, both in his movies and in real life, that it's almost hard to believe he is for real. But say what you want about him, Tarantino knows, respects and loves movies. His newest, Inglourious Basterds, is one of his best with his own unique take on WWII.

Before you go and plop $10 to see this movie, there's some things you should know. Tarantino loves dialogue, lllllloves it, and with a running time of 153 minutes he really gets to delve into dialogue. The good thing to come of it? The dialogue scenes are top-notch with an intensity, a tension that would be hard to duplicate any other way. Other things, the violence can be a little extreme with several graphic, detailed scalpings, a German soldier is beaten to death with a baseball hat, that sort of thing. The other and maybe most important thing; don't go in expecting non-stop action. The movie really has very little action at all until the last 30 minutes or so.

With the story, I don't want to give too much away so here's a real brief summary of the several interweaving storylines. One, Lt. Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt) puts together a special team of Jewish-American soldiers who will be dropped behind enemy lines and basically kill, maim and torture any Nazi they can get their hands on. Two, Parisian cinema owner Shoshana Dreyfus (Melanie Laurent) finds out the German High Command intends to screen a new propaganda movie at her theater. The catch? Shoshana was the lone survivor of her Jewish family's massacre at the hands of SS Colonel Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz) and now she's looking for revenge by taking out the Third Reich's highest figures.

That's it in a nutshell, but anyone who has ever seen a Tarantino movie knows there's much more going on. The stories cross paths repeatedly as Aldo's Basterds become involved with the plot to take out Hitler, and Landa is always seemingly waiting in the background to strike. With some nice stylistic touches, Tarantino leaves his imprint on the movie, breaking the story into 5 chapters with title cards and everything. The opening sequence is almost 20 minutes of the most nerve-wracking dialogue you'll ever see as Landa interrogates a French dairy farmer hiding Shoshana's family in his cellar. It's the perfect game of cat and mouse as Landa toys with the farmer, and a perfect example of what Tarantino is capable of with strong dialogue.

My one disappointment is that the Basterds were underused. Aldo's hit squad is only in the movie for about 45 minutes or so as the story bounces between the Basterds, Landa and Shoshana's interaction with German war hero Fredrick Zoller (Daniel Bruhl) as she prepares for her big debut. The ensemble cast, and that's what it is, no two ways about it, carries this movie. Would I have liked some more background, more explanation? Of course, but what's there with the Basterds is quality stuff, especially an interrogation of German prisoners in the woods. You will be disappointed if you think Brad Pitt is in the movie the whole 150 minutes, but his character is so perfect you'll come away very pleased with the character, especially the ending. His scowling, squinting drawling Tennessean is just more proof that Pitt should do more comedic roles.

As good as Pitt is, and his name will certainly bring audiences in, it's Laurent's and Waltz's movie. Tarantino shoots French actress Laurent like a movie idol, and her plot for revenge sets the whole movie in motion. She's so natural in her scenes, so believable, and you're rooting for her to pull it off, and her scenes late in the movie are haunting and not easily forgettable. Waltz as SS Colonel Landa will get an Oscar nom for his supporting role. Landa is one of the best villains in recent movie history, a charming, intelligent detective labeled the Jew Hunter who crosses paths with all the characters and serves as the link among all the stories.

The rest of the casting has some interesting choices but I can't think of one that doesn't work as I write this. Of the Basterds, there's director Eli Roth as Sgt. Donny Donowitz, the Bear Jew who beats Germans with his baseball bat, Til Schweiger as Hugo Stiglitz, a German soldier who killed 13 Gestapo officers and is recruited by the Basterds, and then Gedeon Burkhard, Samm Levine, Omar Doom, and B.J. Novak. Other strong parts include Michael Fassbender as Lt. Archie Hicox, a British agent assigned to work with the Basterds, Diane Kruger looking like a 1930s/40s movie star as Bridget von Hammersmark, a German movie star and double agent working with the Allies, and even Mike Myers as a British general briefing Hicox. Classic Hollywood fans should look for Rod Taylor in a small part as Winston Churchill too.

This is a movie that at 153 minutes or so could have been much longer as odd as that sounds. Rumors abounded since its showing at Cannes that the Weinstein Company cut 40 minutes from the run time. As good as it is now, it feels like there's much more there, more background, more explanations including one deleted scene with Donny backing in Boston getting his baseball bat and having Jewish families write names of lost loved ones on the bat. Are there flaws? Sure, but nothing that takes away from the experience overall.

It all comes together so nicely here from Tarantino's direction and unique style to the casting, especially Pitt, Laurent and Waltz, the musical soundtrack choices, to the snappy dialogue and visceral violence, and even some rewriting of history. I know I was wavering some going in to see this movie so hopefully something I've written convinces you to go see this in theaters. The movie's last line may be a hint as to what Tarantino thinks of his movie, and I wholeheartedly agree, but I ain't spoiling it here.

Inglourious Basterds (2009): ****/****