Ted 2

I loved 2015's Ted. It's filthy, raunchy, disgusting, stupid, smart and mixed all together, it's a gem. It's also a pretty good stand-alone film. In other words, it don't need any sequels or follow-ups or reboots or any rejigger of any sort. But here we sit, and it got a sequel. Hitting theaters last weekend to mixed reviews and an underwhelming box office performance, here's 2015's Ted 2.

It's been a year since Ted (voice of Seth MacFarlane) has married Tami-Lynn (Jessica Barth) and....well, everything isn't all right in the world. In the midst of a seemingly never-ending fight, Ted and Tami decide the best alternative is to have a baby to save their marriage. Other than the obvious issues of Ted being a teddy bear and not being able to...ya know, reproduce, they quickly hit a roadblock in court. A judge rules that Ted is not a human being. Instead, he's a piece of property. Now with the help of his best friend, John (Mark Wahlberg), and a like-minded young lawyer, Sam (Amanda Seyfried), Ted has to prove without a reasonable doubt that he is in fact, a person, a human being, and not just a little kid's toy. Let the road-tripping, weed-smoking shenanigans begin. No one and nothing is safe...

As I mentioned in my first Ted review, MacFarlane can be a pretty divisive guy, whether it be his humor, his directing, his animated shows...basically everything. I think when it comes to pure humor, he has few equals right now. He manages to find that generally pretty perfect of really smart and truly dumb while all keeping it incredibly entertaining. Sure, there have been misfires along the way, but the laughs are almost always there. Well -- and here comes the twist -- they're not there as much anymore. Just because I loved the first movie so much, I wanted to love this unnecessary but hopefully entertaining sequel just as much. I didn't, and it wasn't even close. There are laughs (no doubt about that), but there are just as many and maybe more misfires along the way.

My worry was this sequel would be more Million Ways to Die than the original Ted. Lovely premise, horrific, so not funny execution. 'Million' was one of the worst movies I saw last year to the point I almost walked out. The unfortunate part is Ted 2 falls somewhere in between with some great laughs that get bogged down in running bits and repetitive scenes that don't get laughs and don't have much energy. Case in point; Patrick Warburton returns as Guy, John's co-worker, this time in a relationship with Rick (Star Trek's Michael Dorn). They joke about weird sexual preferences, beat up nerds at Comic Con (over and over again) and genuinely don't provide many laughs, but the script keeps going back to them. Then, he brings it back around with Warburton (The Tick) and Dorn (Worf) dressing up as their past characters. It can be infuriating how equal parts clever and dumb one script can be.

When the movie succeeds and produces genuine, out-loud laughs, is when the focus is on Ted and John and all their stupid, mind-blowing antics. MacFarlane's voice work is -- as usual -- pretty flawless as we see all the different sides of Ted, MacFarlane bouncing among them with ease from scene to scene. Wahlberg too shows off his funny side, often times playing the straight man while Ted gets the bigger laughs. I'd love to see Wahlberg do his thing on camera with no one sitting next to him as the scenes are filmed. This is a great buddy dynamic as we see in their scene where they sing their made-up words to the Law & Order theme song, their efforts to steal Tom Brady's semen (Yeah, just go with it), and their rapid fire dialogue that reflects two friends that go way, Way back. Two great characters, a movie at its strongest. I just wish there was more.

And that's where the script issues seem to come in. There doesn't seem to be much of a script. The first hour is definitely stronger, but things fall apart in the second half. There's no real pointed direction where things are going, just scenes thrown together that kinda have something to do with the ones preceding them. That wouldn't be an issue if there were more laughs, but there simply aren't. Amanda Seyfried seems kinda out of place and quite the forced love interest for Wahlberg's John. At one point, she sings a campfire song in a nice nod to Three Amigos, but it falls short. As does a pot-smoking montage in a law library, too many Breakfast Club comparisons to mention. These scenes just don't play well to the point the theater was almost dead silent. By the time Giovanni Ribisi shows up -- Yeah, Donny is back! -- and starts dancing and being weird, I'd kinda checked out already.

Just like he proved with 'Million Ways,' MacFarlane is someone some very talented people want to work with. On top of all the above-mentioned names, we also get appearances from the always reliable Morgan Freeman, Mad Men's John Slattery, an expanded part for Barth as Tami, less Sam Jones (unfortunately), sinister John Carroll Lynch, a downbeat doctor in Dennis Haysbert, and a hysterical one-scene appearance from Liam Neeson who's got some questions for Ted at the grocery store and Patrick Stewart returning as our smooth voiced narrator.

When I laughed, I LAUGHED. Ted's appearance on the stand at his trial is priceless. A running bit between John and Ted taking awkward pictures of each other is priceless, and their encounter with Patriots QB Tom Brady is a gem. I just wish there had been more of those laughs. Any comedy is going to have its hit and miss laughs, but all you're usually looking for is more hits than misses. This one comes out about even. If you enjoyed the first one, you'll enjoy this one, but this sequel isn't on par unfortunately.

Ted 2 (2015): ** 1/2 /****

Transcendence

So it seems that it is only a matter of time before technology completely takes over the world, huh? Yeah, Terminator 2: Judgment Day predicted it years ago! More and more though, that prediction is becoming frighteningly true with our reliance on all technologies from smart phones to iPads to all those new-fangled gadgets (I'm not a techie). Ripped apart critically last year, 2014's Transcendence tries to explore that premise.

A brilliant intellectual with quite a following -- some good, some bad -- Dr. Will Caster (Johnny Depp) has long wondered about the potential of artificial intelligence. One of his theories has that A.I. eventually growing to the point that it supersedes all human intelligence (his Transcendence theory) and then who knows what will happen? It is a theory that produces quite a counter, people scared of that potential, people who pull off an assassination attempt on Will because of what he might be up to. As he slowly dies from radiation poisoning, Will begins to work with his wife, Evelyn (Rebecca Hall), and a friend and associated, Max (Paul Bettany), about uploading his consciousness into a potentially thinking computer that will act as his brain and be that missing link in human intelligence turned into A.I. Max sees the potential but also the inherent threat in what they're doing. Evelyn on the other hand, simply wants to preserve her husband in whatever way she can. What will become of this potentially world-altering scientific development?

Talk about a movie that you think 'What could have been.' I loved the idea of 'Transcendence,' what first-time director Wally Pfister and writer Jack Paglen are going for. The execution at times, falls a bit short. For what they set out to do, this is a scenario that at times feels rushed, feels goofy, feels like we're missing something. There's some plot holes I feel an 18-wheeler could drive through comfortably. How does the government not realize what Will's A.I. is doing? How does no one notice millions and millions of dollars changing hands on Wall Street? If the answer is 'Will's A.I. stopped the passing of knowledge,' that's just not a good reason. In a way I can't put my finger on, there's something missing from this tech thriller. It's something that stops it from truly being all it can be. The Marines!

Now that said...I enjoyed this flick. I didn't love it, but whatever. Reviews were universally negative, and 'Transcendence' did struggle in theaters, especially in the U.S. There's an impressive cast put together, and Pfister's background is working as cinematographer on Christopher Nolan's Batman movies so we see some familiar faces in that case. If it doesn't develop as well as it should, so be it. I was intrigued by the premise, the build-up and even if there are holes along the way, I was entertained throughout. It gets goofy -- downright goofy, even stupid -- in the final act but I was invested in it to the end...even if it uses one of those ominous final shots that feature a twist that makes literally NO SENSE. That's for you to decide though. Feels like a lot of folks really disliked this one, but there's enough positive going on to give it a mild recommendation.

Johnny Depp has been in a rut for a couple years now so give him credit here for taking a unique, out of the ordinary lead role. It's not really a SPOILER, but his Dr. Caster is dead 30 minutes into the movie only to see his brain and consciousness uploaded into a computer. In just about every role he's in, Depp -- say whatever else you want -- is a likable on-screen presence. It's a solid part, his monotone delivery as A.I. Jack adding a creepy dimension to the second half of the flick. What is the A.I.'s goal? Is it well-meaning or is there a darker intent? The answer in the end surprised me for sure, but Depp is one of the best parts of the movie. Hall is very good too as his wife, Evelyn, working as the audience is to try and figure out what her husband (or at least her husband's mind) is up to.

Who else to look for? There's some solid names if not necessarily well-written parts, several sticking with Pfister from the Batman flicks. I thought Bettany was good if underused as Max, a researcher who immediately sees the threat of uploading Will's mind who also possibly maybe probably has a thing for Evelyn. Also look for Cillian Murphy (FBI), Morgan Freeman (necessary wise older man role), Kate Mara (cute extremist who hates technology), Cole Hauser (mean-looking army officer), and Clifton Collins Jr. (dupe for Will's ever-building power).

As I look back on 'Transcendence,' I'm remembering all those goofy moments that could have used a little more development, a little more time to breathe. The story has a ton of potential, maybe enough to justify a two-part miniseries that could have explained the science in more depth. As is though, it's a slightly above average technological thriller. Worth a watch/rent.

Transcendence (2014): ** 1/2 /****

The Lego Movie

Even as a kid watching Toy Story, I was aware of what I was watching, of how truly good it was. As I've gotten older and revisited it while watching on my own, with my niece, with my cousins, I really appreciate what a great, innovative, unique, creative story it is. That's a stand-alone statement, a movie statement in a bubble. How else has it impacted movies? Animated movies haven't quite been the same ever since, Toy Story's influence especially seen in Wreck-It Ralph and most recently with 2014's The Lego Movie.

In the universe of the Lego, an ordinary construction worker, Emmet (Chris Pratt), has spent his whole life trying to be a part of the group. He wants to be liked. He wants to be accepted, and he likes his life -- rigid though it may be. One day after his shift on a construction site, Emmet sees something strange and rather than report it, he investigates. A mysterious, beautiful woman, Wyldstyle (Elizabeth Banks) is lurking around the construction site, and when he follows her, Emmet actually discovers a mythical object, the Piece of Resistance. His discovery leads Wyldstyle to believe that Emmet is the prophesied Special, the key to the resistance against President Business (Will Ferrell), seemingly a good president for Lego Land. Wyldstyle and a small group of Legos, the Master Builders, including their leader, Vitruvius (Morgan Freeman), are fighting against President Business and now, Emmet could be the unwilling, unknowing key to it all.

When 'Lego' was released in February, I wanted to see it in theaters but just never got around to it. The reviews almost uniformly glowed, and audiences ate it up with a current box office total internationally of $467 million. And in the end, it is excellent. Lots of talent assembled to lend their voices to the story, a very unique jumping off point, and creative in the same way Toy Story and its sequels are. Director Phil Lord and Christopher Miller do something familiar and make it memorable. Yeah, some party poopers criticized the movie for being one huge advertisement for Lego, and to a point, I suppose that is fair. But this is a movie that's more than that. You think it is one thing, and it goes somewhere else, but that's all for now. Some quasi-spoilers later maybe.

Like the best, the most memorable animated movies -- whether the modern age of CGI or the old school drawn cartoons -- there's got to be something that sticks with you. Here with 'Lego' it's something special and unique that will sound almost stupid describing it. Yeah, it is a world of Legos. Duh, right? Obvious but innovative. When a building gets knocked down, you hear the thundering....clicks of all those pieces moving around. When a water tower collapses, little blue "water" pieces rush after characters. When Wyldstyle adjusts her hair, that hair moves in robotic fashion JUST LIKE a Lego piece would. It sounds dumb, but those little touches go a long way in providing some great moments, putting a smile on your face. 'Lego' is full of such moments, in jokes for adults while still providing some laughs for the kids in the audience. That's where the best animated movies reside, somewhere in between, good for adults and kids.

I loved the voice talents assembled here. Some are recognizable the second you hear them speak while others take some thinking on as the story develops. A rising star in Hollywood, Pratt throws himself into the body of Emmet, our not so intrepid construction worker who could save the Lego world...or maybe not if he chickens out. Banks too commits, having some fun as Wyldstyle, a fiery counter to Emmet's generally quiet, well, everything. Freeman has some fun as Vitruvius, the wise elder who seemingly knows everything and serves as a guide and mentor of sorts to Emmet. The other Master Builders who become part of the crew include a clueless Batman (scene-stealing Will Arnett), ever positive Unikitty (Community's Alison Brie), Benny (Charlie Day), a 1980s spaceman frustrated with modern Lego technology, and Metal Beard (Nick Offerman), a pirate mutant with all sorts of enhanced body parts. It's a fun crew with a lot of variety, a bizarre-o version of the men-on-a-mission formula.

But wait, there's more! I'm a big Will Ferrell fan so it's always cool to see him throw himself into a fun part like this. His Lord Business is a great villain, over the top and goofy and always ready with a laugh. His enforcer is an equally scene-stealing Liam Neeson as Good Cop/Bad Cop, able to twirl his head around within a conversation, an excellent site gag. There's plenty of other voices to listen for including Channing Tatum and Jonah Hill as Superman and Green Lantern (desperately trying to be friends with Superman). Without giving too much away, also look/listen for Will Forte, Dave Franco, Shaquille O'Neal and a few others sprinkled in here and there. It's the randomness that works, especially when the Master Builders council is called, assembling all of the above with Shaq and the 2002 NBA All Stars, a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle, a feuding Gandalf and Dumbledore, some historical heroes and then there's Emmett, a regular old construction worker.

So all well and good, right? And it is. It builds to something special here that as I look back on it is criminally straightforward. It feels weird saying this with an animated movie, but there's a heck of a twist in the final act that brings the movie together, even managing to take the entire movie up a notch or two. I LOVED this twist. It makes a good movie into a great one. There are hints along the way, but I wasn't expecting it at all. This is a smart, funny flick that delivers a message without being heavy-handed about it (We all have talents and skills. It's just a matter of finding your place with those talents). Also, it's funny in a self-conscious way, including two songs, Everything is Awesome by Tegan and Sara featuring The Lonely Island -- listen HERE -- and my personal favorite, Batman's self-written theme of sorts (listen HERE), Arnett absolutely nailing it.

An easy movie to recommend.

The Lego Movie (2014): ***/**** 

The Shawshank Redemption

Sometimes you just have to shake your head at audiences and moviegoers. Some movies just aren't meant to make some money in theaters no matter how good reviews are, no matter how good the cast and crew is. It just isn't meant to be. Take 1994's The Shawshank Redemption, a movie that barely recovered its budget in theaters but has become a ridiculously popular movie in the 20 years since its release. How good is it? On the IMDB Top 250 (of all-time), it's currently rocking the No. 1 ranking...of All-Time. Not the most scientific voting, but still...

It's 1947 when banker Andy Dufresne (Tim Robbins) is convicted of murdering his wife and the man she was having an affair with. Andy maintains his innocence but the evidence is overwhelmingly against him, and he receives consecutive life sentences as a verdict. He is sent to Shawshank Prison near Portland, Maine and settles into prison life as best he can. More than that, he just wants to survive. Days to weeks, weeks to months, months to years, Andy becomes close friends with a fellow prisoner, Red (Morgan Freeman), who is similarly serving a sentence for murder. Prison life is one step above hell itself, Andy carving out a niche for himself as best he can. Will it ultimately prove to be too much? Will it wear Andy down over the years? Can he somehow prove his innocence when on one else believes him and the evidence against him seems like a sure thing? In prison with life sentences on the line, only time will tell.

What a difficult movie to review in a somewhat concise plot synopsis. I tried to build this movie up to someone recently who had never seen it, and without giving too much away....well, let's just say it proved difficult. It's difficult, but it's for good reason. In the 20 years since 'Redemption' was released, it has gained quite the positive reputation, director Frank Darabont also adapting a screenplay from a short story by acclaimed author Stephen King. For about three years in the early 2000s, AMC and TNT and TBS seemed to show this movie EVERY SINGLE WEEKEND, and I probably watched it every other weekend or so. It had been years since I'd seen the movie straight through in one sitting, and not surprisingly, it holds up one basically all levels. Who knows how it will be remembered in years to come. Will it be a classic? A highly-regarded film? Maybe both, but for me, it's a personal favorite.

As I prepare to write some reviews, I try to identify some flaws, if I haven't already from during the viewing. So those flaws here....yeah, there aren't any. This is one of those perfect movies you can sit back and appreciate on any number of levels. The biggest strength is the story, a dark, unsettling story that is able to blend drama and comedy and even elements of horror effortlessly. The look of the movie reflects the story, colors washed out to pale shades of blue and grey, the Ohio State Reformatory serving as the backdrop for Shawshank. The immense prison walls tower over the prisoners, its hallways holding all kinds of hellish horrors. Another of the movie's strongest features is the soundtrack from Thomas Newman, my personal favorite score from an excellent composer. Listen to the entire soundtrack HERE, music equal parts emotional and moving with unsettling and uncomfortable.

Above all else, this movie rides on the shoulders of its stars, Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman. Talk about an effortless chemistry. These two pros make it look downright easy. This isn't acting, just two very talented actors doing their thing. Natural doesn't begin to describe the power of their performances, the relationship between Andy and Red developing into a genuine friendship as the years pass. Their conversations crackle, two men talking because, well, because there's plenty of time to talk in prison. They talk about life, about their pasts, their likes and dislikes, but bigger things too. Andy and Red talk about hope -- check that, Hope -- and dreams, about something bigger, about finding your spot and persevering no matter what's thrown in front of you. I can't think of other films where Robbins and Freeman were better than this. Two great actors bringing two flawed, fascinating characters to life.

Who else to look for? How about evil personified as Shawshank's warden (Bob Gunton) and his lead guard and enforcer Byron Hadley (Clancy Brown), two of the most evil, despicable villains ever. James Whitmore, 73 years old at the time and having worked in Hollywood since the late 1940s, is a scene-stealer as Brooks, an aging prisoner who's become institutionalized as his sentence runs into its fifth decade. Other prisoners include William Salder as Haywood, an overbearing at times but generally likable inmate, with Larry Brandenburg, Neil Giuntoli, Brian Libby, Joseph Ragno and David Proval rounding out Red's clique of prisoners. Also look for Gil Bellows as Tommy, a young prisoner who comes to Shawshank in the mid 1960s with knowledge that could change Andy's life.

Maybe the biggest effect this movie has had on audiences is Morgan Freeman Narration Syndrome. Featuring one of the all-time great voiceover narrations, 'Shawshank' propelled Freeman into another stratosphere. It would be fun to listen to Freeman read a phone book. He's that good. The narration is what holds the movie together, almost 20 years of story packed into 142 minutes. There is a simple elegance to the narration, conversations about hope and fate, destiny and love, all of it giving a deeper sense of what's going on. It also features one of my all-time favorite movie lines, Red taking one of Andy's thoughts to heart. 'Get busy living or get busy dying....Damn right.' Just good stuff. Narration can be overdone, condescending, pretentious, but here? It's damn perfect.

There really isn't a weakness in this movie. Not a one. Now that said, the last 40 minutes or so is one of the strongest extended sequences in film history. This is a story that builds and builds, but you're not necessarily sure where. It doesn't drop hints so when a twist comes along, it genuinely shocks and surprises. One twist and surprise on top of each other -- all of them working effortlessly -- that don't feel forced. Thankfully, no 'Gotcha!' moments here. It leads to an ending that is beyond perfect. Moving, emotional and dramatic, including a beautiful final shot set to Newman's music. One of those great movies, a classic that gets better with repeated viewings. Sit back and enjoy it beginning to end.

The Shawshank Redemption (1994): ****/****

Outbreak

Released way back in 2011, Steven Soderbergh's Contagion was one of the best movies I saw in 2012. A seemingly unstoppable virus is tearing its way across the world. Can it be stopped? Smart, well-written, well-acted and stylish, it was a great movie. Released 16 years earlier, 1995's Outbreak deals with a very similar story and formula. Where does it stand in comparison?

A longtime disease specialist/virologist working for the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USARMIID), Sam Daniels (Dustin Hoffman) and his team have been sent to Zaire to deal with a new disease that wiped out an entire village. What they find is terrifying, a virus that replicates quickly, claiming victims within a 24-hour period. Daniels' crew manages to contain the disease within the village, taking samples and clearing out before the disease can spread. Just days later though, a patient in a hospital in Boston has the symptoms similar to the disease. Then there's another in California, and then a whole town. How did the disease spread so quickly? Can it be stopped before it wipes out thousands and maybe millions? Daniels and his team go to work, but there may be more at work within the government than they know trying to stop them.

From director Wolfgang Petersen, 'Outbreak' is a good example of a modern disaster film that doesn't have to resort to gimmicks to be good. When disaster films were at their most popular in the late 1970s and early 1980s, they became cliched quickly, trying to one-up each other one after another. That's not really an issue here, a pretty smart script laying out a situation that could really happen. Viruses and diseases are constantly evolving. Can the medical field and the government stay ahead of those evolutions? 'Outbreak' blends that intelligent premise with an all-star cast and lets things take off. For the most part, I liked it....for awhile. That's for a little later though. For now, here's some positives.

In much the same way I enjoyed Contagion, 'Outbreak' is at its best in dealing with the social implications involved here. We see how the USARMIID and the CDC respond, trying to react as quickly as possible. We see the government planning ahead for all possible contingency plans, however dark they may be. Petersen's got an eye for it, covering a ton of ideas and scenarios in relatively quick fashion. While there's a lot of characters and situations, it doesn't feel rushed. The disease spreads quickly, the virus jumping and developing quickly. It's all cut together at a lightning-pace, bouncing among all the different affected parties. Things take a turn for the dark when a California town is a breakout point, patients piling up at an alarming rate. The USARMIID, CDC, military and government descend on the town, other advances being made to track down the source. How did this disease spread? Those are the coolest moments, a frightening premise to think about in our current world.

Now for that all-star cast!!! It's interesting watching Dustin Hoffman do just about anything on-screen, and he's a great lead here. Unfortunately some of his character background is dealing with his recently divorced wife, Robby (Rene Russo), who's taken a job at the CDC. Oh, divorce drama! Still, Hoffman and Russo have a good chemistry. Rounding out Daniels' team are Kevin Spacey as Casey, the smart-ass, highly intelligent assistant who's worked for years with Daniels, and Cuba Gooding Jr. as Salt, a new recruit with an army and medical background but no field experience. Representing the government/military higher-ups, Morgan Freeman and Donald Sutherland play highly-ranked officers who know more than they're letting on (courtesy of a 1967 flashback to open the film we see). Also look for Patrick Dempsey as an unknowing spreader of the disease, a cool, quick and essential subplot to the story.

And there it is. A good, creepy, entertaining story that could have been based in some sort of reality. And then there's the last 45 minutes. Hoffman's Daniels becomes a superhero, Gooding Jr. his intrepid sidekick, the duo traveling all over California, Sutherland's evil general in hot pursuit, and all against the clock. There's helicopter chases, a trap for a cute, disease-ridden monkey, an evil general obsessed with something, taking over a TV news broadcast, a helicopter with an endless supply of fuel, and a big old shift in tone that goes from serious and dramatic to goofy and campy. The movie is still good, but the last third is pretty rough. We're not sure who makes it, and it all is resolved rather quickly in a flash. Could have been great in the end, but it's okay instead.

Outbreak (1995): ** 1/2 /****

The Bucket List

What do you want to do before you die? Things you want to see and do, people you want to meet, places you want to visit, that sort of thing. It's a simple thought, all the things the world has to offer before you....kick the bucket! Words are fun! That's the basic premise behind 2007's The Bucket List.

Sharing a hospital room, Carter Chambers (Morgan Freeman) and Edward Cole (Jack Nicholson) seemingly have very little in common. Carter is family fan with a wife, kids and grandchildren, working for years as a mechanic to support them all. Edward is rich beyond any needs -- he actually owns the hospital, a lot of hospitals -- without any family other than a quartet of ex-wives. The only thing they really have in common is their diagnosis, both men have been diagnosed with terminal lung cancer and have been given anywhere from six months to a year to live. Bonding almost in spite of their differences, they decide to make the most of their last few months, doing all those things they wanted to do but never got around to. Leaving their hospital rooms behind, Carter and Edward intend to enjoy what little time they have.

From director Rob Reiner, this 2007 drama-comedy was mismarketed if you ask me. It was billed as a lighthearted comedy of sorts, goofy and dumb as two old guys make their way around the world doing all sorts of crazy stuff. 'List' does have those moments where the physical comedy is embraced, but thankfully not used too much and overdone. What is it then? It is a pretty good human drama with some touches of humor. 'List' embraces the inherent darkness of its premise, two senior citizens finding out their death is coming sooner than they expected, while still having those moments of humor. Just a fair warning, don't go in expecting 90-plus minutes of laugh out loud goofiness. There are some laughs, but it's far more of a drama than it was made out to be.

Now all that said, laughs in a comedy or some actual emotions in a drama, it's Morgan Freeman and Jack Nicholson. This is quite the legendary one-two punch in terms of acting power, and we're the beneficiaries of the casting. Neither performance is of the award-winning variety, the script from Justin Zackham a solid job, but both actors play up their parts. Freeman is his typical reliable self as Carter, a family man who's started to struggle with his older years, especially now that he's more of a grandparent than a parent. He's not upset he had to care his family, but he does wish maybe he could have accomplished more. Nicholson seems to be playing a variation on...well, himself, but there's depth to his Edward Cole part. He's been married four times but he also loves being single which causes some problems. Very different individuals but very interesting characters.

So what are they up to? They intend to accomplish a lot, ranging from visiting the Great Pyramids in Cairo and the base of Mount Everest in the Himalayas in Nepal, from skydiving to driving classic Shelby Mustangs, doing a safari to visiting the Taj Mahal. The episodic storytelling is cool, covering a lot of ground, even if the CGI is especially bad in the skydiving sequence. The checking off of items on the bucket list becomes secondary though, the focus more on the odd couple-like friendship that develops between the two men. During their travels and adventures, they do get to know each other, know what drove them to this point, what their lives have been like. Their scenes in the hospital are just as good as they first get to know each other, both knowing the other is struggling but able to move on and just talk or play cards. There's an effortless charm to the friendship/relationship, a chemistry that pros like Freeman and Nicholson make look criminally easy.

The rest of the cast is limited to a couple key supporting parts. Sean Hayes is very good as Cole's much-maligned assistant, always ready to bust his boss if he's asking for it. Also look for Rob Morrow as Cole's doctor who must give him the tough news while Beverly Todd plays Carter's wife of 40-plus years. Freeman and Nicholson are in almost every single scene -- together or separately -- so much more of a supporting cast wouldn't have been needed.

I wasn't sure what to expect of the ending here. My doomsday scenario had some miracle cure being invented so that the characters we've come to like are somehow, some way saved from certain death. I won't give any spoilers away, but it is a very effective ending. There is a relative twist revealed in the last 20-25 minutes that caught me by surprise mostly because I thought I had it figured out long before the reveal. The finale itself works well, a fitting end about two different men with very different backgrounds who become friends through their similar, life-altering medical conditions. An enjoyable, low-key movie.

The Bucket List (2007): ***/****

Last Vegas

Everyone liked The Hangover, right? Yeah, we don't have to go into the entertaining, but completely unnecessary sequels, but that original was pretty good, huh?!? When I saw the trailer for this movie, my first thought was "Oh, that sounds cool, The Hangover for older people...and with an A-list cast!" How can you go wrong? I submit that you cannot. Here we go with 2013's Last Vegas.

In his late 60s and a successful businessman, Billy (Michael Douglas) is getting married for the first time, proposing to his 32-year old girlfriend (Bre Blair). To celebrate the upcoming wedding, Billy calls his childhood friends, Archie (Morgan Freeman) and Sam (Kevin Kline), who agree that they need to do a bachelor party right...in Las Vegas. There's a problem though, the fourth member of the group of friends, Paddy (Robert De Niro), refuses to go, holding a grudge against Billy for an incident from the past. Archie and Sam manage to convince a less than excited Paddy to go with to the bachelor party and fly to Las Vegas to meet up with Billy. Each of the four friends is looking for something out of the weekend, and maybe they'll be able to mend the fences from all their past issues. Maybe, just maybe, they'll have some fun doing it too.

This drama-comedy from director Jon Turteltaub is an easy one to figure out if audiences will like it. Watch the trailer and you'll know immediately if this is the movie for you. It's The Hangover with less partying, drinking and drugs, replaced with jokes for an older audience about health problems, aging quicker than ever, and plenty of jokes about the prostate, having to pee a lot, and all your friends passing away or getting sick. I'm making it sound far more negative than it was -- I laughed a lot during the movie -- but come on. It's Douglas, De Niro, Freeman and Kline in a movie together, a story about rekindling old friendships. It's familiar, like home cooking, and funny throughout. This isn't a comedy that rewrites the genre or throws anything new your way. Sit back and watch some very talented actors have a lot of fun together. That's it.

Movies like this are supposed to be just that, a hell of a lot of fun. So what's a good recipe for making that happen? Put four actors together with the caliber of Michael Douglas, Morgan Freeman, Kevin Kline and Robert De Niro and.....nope, that's it. I would watch this quartet hang out at a bar shooting the breeze. That's it. These guys are four Hollywood legends and working off a script from Dan Fogelman, they are having a hell of a lot of fun. The four friends grew up together in New York City, dubbing themselves the Flatbush Four. They're grown up, started families, become grandparents, drifted apart some, but they keep in touch as much as possible. Given a chance to reunite, they're able to put past differences aside (mostly). This is a very talented quartet working together, all getting a chance to show off their comedic timing -- Freeman and Kline are especially funny -- as they have a hell of a weekend in Las Vegas.

Each is given a gimmick of sorts, a little thing needed to work out. Douglas' Billy is getting hitched but is concerned about seeing Paddy who is pissed at him for a recent event Billly was unable to attend. Their friendship is one that borders on rivalry, especially when they both meet and like Mary Steenburgen's sassy, smart-mouthed lounge singer. Freeman's Archie is coming off a mild stroke, his son (Michael Ealy) worried about his sick dad, placing limits on eating, drinking and just about everything while pushing pill after pill. Kline's Sam is recouping from hip surgery, hating his life in Retirement Village, USA. He's given permission by his wife (Joanna Gleason) to have sex -- no strings attached -- with any woman while in Vegas. For Archie and Sam, the weekend becomes about reuniting with friends but also reclaiming their wild oats. That becomes the funnest part of the 105-minute movie.

Also look for Entourage alum Jerry Ferrara as a Vegas partygoer who gets on the Flatbush Four's bad side and Romany Malco as Lonnie, the Four's personal assistant and tour guide of sorts at their swanky hotel villa. Even look for a quick and you'll miss it cameo from rapper 50 Cent.  

The story is focused on the four friends -- obviously -- as they explore Vegas, meet the dreamy lounge singer, work as judges on a bikini contest, get into a high-end nightclub with some pricey bottle service, gamble a little bit here and there, bust each others' balls but don't let outsiders do the same (only friends can do that), throw the biggest party Las Vegas has ever seen and maybe find out what brought them all together as friends and kept them as friends for over 60 years. It isn't a great movie because it isn't meant to be. More movies should be like this, funny, well-acted and entertaining throughout. Highly recommended if for nothing else than Morgan Freeman is a really good dancer. Age be damned.

Last Vegas (2013): ***/****

Now You See Me

Here we sit again. I love a good twist in a movie. It's fun for any number of reasons. Will the twist work? Will it fall short? Maybe the best thing going though is can you get ahead of the twist? Can you figure it out before the reveal? It goes both ways. Now movies are trying to dupe us. The end result? Movies like 2013's Now You See Me, obsessed with making the audience look stupid.

Las Vegas audiences have seen just about everything, but they've seen nothing like the show put on by four street performers, magicians and con men dubbed The Four Horsemen, headlined by J. Daniel Atlas (Jesse Eisenberg). During a show in front of a packed house, the Horsemen seek the help of an audience member and actually manage to somehow rob a bank in France of $3 million francs. Is it deception? A sleight of hand? Or is something magically mysterious going on? An FBI agent, Dylan Rhodes (Mark Ruffalo), is called in to head the case and figure out exactly what's going on. He's given the help of an inexperienced Interpol agent (Melanie Laurent) but is dealt a tough hand almost immediately. The Horsemen welcome the challenge. If the FBI and police are going to prosecute them, they're all but admitting that magic is in fact, real. The Horsemen say they've got two more shows and it will all come together. What are they up to?

Released in theaters late this spring, 'Now' was a surprise success with audiences, earning over $320 million worldwide. It was so successful a sequel has already been confirmed. I can't wait! Yeah! Reviews were generally pretty mixed, and I was skeptical going into my first viewing. The previews looked a little too goofy for my liking. At the same time, the cast listing looked absolutely ridiculous. We're talking lots of very talented individuals here working together. As is so often the case though with big, impressive casts, there's too much going on. Still, the cast is nuts. Unfortunately a very talented cast is wasted in this heist thriller from director Louis Leterrier. I really do my best not to give spoilers away so I'll try here, but it's going to be difficult.

Magic is inherently....well....mysterious, right? How do magicians pull off those crazy tricks? Is there an element of the supernatural in their acts? That's the challenge here. In the movie's first scene, Eisenberg's Atlas addresses the point of the movie. While you're trying to figure out his trick, he's pulling a fast one on you in the opposite direction. And there's the movie. While we're trying to figure out how the Four Horsemen pull off their jobs, the actual job/heist is being pulled somewhere else. 'Now' is admitting it is trying to trick us, and that's where things blow up. It is so interested in tricking us that any degree of reality, believability, or coherent semblance of anything is completely thrown out the window. Oh, they didn't really rob the Parisian bank? Oh, but they kinda did? Oh, all of their plans involved meticulous detail that no real life plan could possibly hinge on?

The catch is that the twist isn't really as clever as it thinks it is. Oddly enough, it's both really obvious and really out of left field. If you pay attention early when a character discusses some personal history, you can start to put the pieces together. That's as far as it goes. When the reveal comes, it defies description. It is so mind-blowingly stupid that it pained me to go back and thought how it all fit together. In order for it to work, whole scenes, whole sequences that we've already seen are now basically null and void. Again, no spoilers because I want you to experience the badness of this movie. Let it be known though. It is real bad.

Okay, now for the cast. Along with Eisenberg (who isn't as obnoxious as usual), the Four Horsemen include Woody Harrelson, Isla Fisher and Dave Franco. As their notoriety rises, we actually see little of them for long stretches. Ruffalo and Laurent are decent together, but we get the pleasure of seeing the what if angle of their relationship. Along with that duo in the law enforcement wing, we get Michael Kelly and Common, neither given much to do except look foolish as the Horsemen one-up and dupe them again. But wait, there's more! Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman both have key supporting roles. The parts are so thinly written that we never really learn much about anyone in terms of background, motivation or actual personality traits. Cool characters/actors in name only.

I also didn't care for the score from composer Brian Tyler, a kinda 1970s crime thriller throwback that's too obvious as it blares away with each passing scene. I had moderate at best expectations for this movie, but it was frustratingly bad. At the expense of any good story, 'Now' goes for the huge twist that depends on shock value more than making sense in terms of the movie. I can't wait to not see the follow-up. Oh, I also like the assumption that if you're a con man street performer, you're also an expert in hand-to-hand combat. I especially liked Franco's street performer doing battle with Ruffalo by whipping playing cards at him, Ruffalo comically yelling back. Unintentionally funny, a light moment in a sea of badness.

Now You See Me (2013): */****

Oblivion

I think the western genre will always be my favorite. Even though there just aren't many westerns released anymore, it's still No. 1 in my head. What's No. 2 on that list? The more and more I delve into it, I have to say it's science fiction. Like a western, there can be something familiar, even comforting about it. On a different level though, even lousy efforts can still be entertaining because something new was tried. What about when something new is tried....and it works on basically any level? Somewhat familiar but still an excellent film, 2013's Oblivion.

It's 2077 on Earth, but it's unlike the Earth we know. In 2017 there was an alien invasion that destroyed much of the Moon and ravaged Earth, the human race winning the war but destroying their planet in the process. Now some 60 years later, surviving humans live on Titan, a moon of Saturn, while the Tet hovers in the Earth's atmosphere, harvesting energy from the oceans to help the colony on Titan survive. A man named Jack Harper (Tom Cruise) works with the Tet but down on Earth as an engineer, a fix-it man of sorts who helps the Tet's drone operate and stay functional, receiving help from Vika (Andrea Riseborough), his mission control. Jack and Vika are just weeks away from the end of their tour before they too can fly to Titan, but Jack has begun to question things. He has memories of long ago, long before the war that ravage Earth, but that doesn't make sense. He hadn't even been born yet. Where do these memories come from? On patrol one day, he sees a ship crash in a dangerous zone populated by Scavengers, the remaining aliens. What answers will he find, if any? Will he even survive?

This is a difficult movie to review, but I'll say this early. I loved this movie....a lot. From director Joseph Kosinski, 'Oblivion' was a relative success in theaters but struggled to recover its rather large budget. Critical reviews pointed out a thin story with a very strong visual look and strong performances. I liked the story so I'll disagree there, but on we go. The script went through some rewrites and studios in getting made, finally ending up with the version we see in 2013. It does what I like best about science fiction. It lays something out for you, explains it a bit, and then builds the tension as we look for answers. Why does it stand above the rest? It does all those things, and the payoff works extremely well. The revelation works. It doesn't disappoint like high-reaching science fiction stories sometimes do. Visuals, story, characters, for me it all worked. I can't say enough about this one, but I'll try.

Maybe the coolest thing about Oblivion is that while it is its own film, it also knows where its science fiction roots come from. Its post-apocalypse world has some cool nods to previous sci-fi classics, a nice touch by Kosinski and screenwriters Karl Gajdusek and Michael Arndt. The alien invasion left much of the planet ravage by nuclear weapons, leaving "Radiation Zones" behind, a modernized updated of the Forbidden Zone from Planet of the Apes. Cruise's Jack searches the world for evidence of a world long since gone, finding books all over, a cool touch that reminded me of Fahrenheit 451. Jack's Zone 49 is stationed somewhere on the east coast, a key part of his zone being a ruined New York City. On these ventures down to the surface, it certainly has the feel of I Am Legend, The Last Man on Earth, Omega Man, all those last surviving man sci-fi flicks. It's these little touches that bring it up a notch in my head, a tip of the cap to those that came before while on its own journey to carve out its own niche.

What Oblivion is able to do is that much more impressive because of the scale. A war-ravaged, dying Earth is huge in scope, but we only get six real speaking parts. Cruises commits himself like he always does, bringing a very real, personal edge to Jack. It's easy to root for him, especially as he begins to look for answers for questions that just don't seem to add up. Riseborough is excellent at his side as Victoria, his mission control from their Zone 49 headquarters, a futuristic high-rise up above the clouds. Melissa Leo plays Sally, more of voice work than anything, the Tet's representative that gives Jack, Vika and Zone 49 their daily updates and missions. Olga Kurylenko plays Julia, a survivor of a wrecked ship Jack comes across who knows more truths than he could have counted on. Without giving too much away, Morgan Freeman and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau play Beech and Sykes, two men who end up playing key parts in Jack's decision.

I typically try to mention the not so glamorous parts of a movie as part of a paragraph with other stuff mentioned. Here, it's hard to do when talking about the visuals the music. The visual look of the movie is a stunner, a sea of dull, cool blacks, whites, grays and blacks as we see what Earth has become. The CGI blends seamlessly with the real-life action, Iceland serving as much of the backdrop for this post-apocalyptic Earth. The story is interesting in itself so the beautiful backdrop and location shooting works almost like a bonus. As for the soundtrack from M83's Anthony Gonzales, I loved it. It balances out the big, booming epic action scenes with the quiet, personal emotional scenes like the best scores do. The song over the final credits -- listen HERE -- featuring Susanne Sundfor is a great conclusion to it all as well.  

I don't want to give away too much here. Things take a big turn nearing the hour-mark in a 124-minute long movie, but in a good way. As I mentioned, the revelations don't feel forced. They're surprising in their revelations, but you never get the sense that Kosinski and the script were giggling to themselves. "Oh, baby, the audience will never know what hit them!!!" It's twists, surprises and revelations that work within the natural flow of the story. It's a beautiful film, and like the best sci-fi, it manages to create its own world from the war-torn Earth to the futuristic home in the clouds, Jack's Bubble Ship to his honed-in motorcycles, it all works. The ending payoff won't disappoint either as a handful of scenes left a lasting impression on me. Can't recommend it enough. Seek this one out.

Oblivion (2013): ****/****

Olympus Has Fallen

There was a time when action movies were simple. Ah, yes, we're going in the Wayback Nostalgia Machine again so brace yourself. There were movies where the good guys were good guys, and the bad guys were bad guys, despicable without an ounce of anything even remotely redeeming. I like to call this time in Hollywood history.....the 1980s. That's simplifying the premise too much, but my point is valid. We had the Russians/Soviets/Commies to root against. In the vein of those straightforward, black and white action movies come 2013's Olympus Has Fallen.

A longtime Secret Service agent and the head of the Presidential detail, Mike Banning (Gerard Butler) is removed from his post when President Benjamin Asher (Aaron Eckhart)'s wife is killed accidentally in a winter car wreck. Banning leaves the Secret Service and takes a job in Washington D.C. as a U.S. Treasury agent. Some 18 months pass, and Mike still yearns to get back to what he was so good at and loved. He may get his chance. Sneaking into the White House as part of a South Korean diplomacy party, a North Korean paramilitary terrorist, Kang (Rick Yune), leads a well coordinated attack that decimates Washington and takes over the White House, capturing the President and much of his cabinet. As the bodies mount in the lightning-quick strike, Mike is among those fighting back, even managing to get into the White House in all the bloody, bullet-riddled chaos. As the terrorists make their demands and the nation and the world wait to see what happens, Mike works from the inside, using all his know-how and skills to take down the North Koreans.

Does this movie sound even remotely familiar? It should. From director Antoine Fuqua (Training Day, Tears of the Sun), 'Olympus' is a not so subtle tweaking of Die Hard meets Air Force One. Whole scenes from those movies are tweaked, twisted and prodded here and there to make it slightly different. More than just those two movies, it plays like every action movie you've ever seen and will see ever again down the road. So what to say about this one rather than wrap it up here? Ready for a twist? I LOVED this movie. It's so epically stupid I can't even describe, but I loved it. I betcha didn't see that one coming, now did you? Don't be confused. This isn't a good movie with all its mindless action, cardboard characters and goofy one-liners. What is it then? This is a popcorn movie. Sit back with a big tub of popcorn, turn off your brain and just enjoy a movie for a change.

So how to explain why I liked this movie? Action movies aren't just action movies anymore. So often they have to throw a ridiculous twist at you or telegraph a horrifically unsubtle, heavy-handed message at you. 'Olympus' gets back to the basics in a big way. Americans = Good. North Koreans = Bad. The timing is also interesting considering North Korea's recent threats of firing nuclear weapons at the U.S. but that's for someone significantly more cultured and intelligent than me to analyze. I'm more of an explosions and gunfight kind of guy. If familiar, the premise is very cool, an unsettling attack on Washington D.C. setting the tone for the rest of the movie. It's incredibly uncomfortable to watch civilians get shot down in the street, the Washington Monument crumbling, the White House under heavy attack with Secret Service and military forces shot down in droves doing their duty. In a very straightforward movie, there's something primal in these scenes. If it sounds simplistic on my part, so be it. America gets attacked, and Americans fight back. Cue a pissed-off Scotsman in Gerard Butler, and we've got ourselves an action flick.

I like Gerard Butler. I don't always like his selection in movies, but I like him just the same. This is him doing what he should be doing. He handles himself well in drama and comedy, but I think he's best as an action star. Here as the ex-Army Ranger turned Secret Service agent turned Treasury agent, it's ideal casting. His past haunts him, and he wants to make things right. When the White House, the President, and America (cue dramatic music), Butler's Banning steps to the plate. As an action star, he's extremely capable. He's believable in his fight scenes, believable as he sneers and snides his way through countless cheesy one-liners. The dynamic between Banning and Yune's Kang is eerily reminiscent of Bruce Willis and Alan Rickman in Die Hard so as long as you're going to rip a movie off, at least rip off a good one. Moral of the story is this, Gerard Butler is cool and a more than worthy leading man as an action hero.

The casting on the whole is solid. It's also fair to say not much of the talent assembled here is given much to do, but whatever, minor complaint. Eckhart is a solid President, an everyman who wants the best for his country and his son (not shrill but talented Finley Jacobsen). His Cabinet and the government higher-ups include Morgan Freeman as the Speaker of the House, Melissa Leo as the Secretary of Defense, Robert Forster as Army Chief of Staff, Sean O'Bryan as Deputy National Security Advisor and Angela Bassett as the head of the Secret Service. Oh, yeah, also look for Dylan McDermott, Ashley Judd, Radha Mitchell and Cole Hauser in key supporting roles. Lots of people, lots of talent. Underused and/or misused maybe, but it's fun seeing so many big names together.

Enough with all this acting mumbo-jumbo. This is a movie about action and gunfights and stabbings and explosions! Borrowing heavily from Die Hard, Banning works from inside-out at the White House, trying to take down the North Koreans one by one. Oh, and those North Koreans are highly trained commandos so we're in store for some good, old-fashioned hand-to-hand combat. If it's a little cliched, so be it. The bad guys for the most part can't hit anything (Mike), but Mike can hit everything (North Koreans). The North Korean attack on D.C. is something else to watch, a meticulously coordinated attack that's brutal in its efficiency. Without giving away too much, the action is brutal, hard-hitting and even features some solid surprises along the way.

Is this one predictable? Oh, yes. You've probably got a good sense of where this one is heading as of right now....without having seen a second. Wait!!! Morgan Freeman becomes the President?!?! The North Koreans are brilliant in executing a plan but can't capture one freaking man?!? We get lots of shots of American flags blowing in the wind -- to composer Trevor Morris' patriotic score -- and a general feeling of patriotism and national pride. It's a good movie. Don't overthink it or its rather obvious influences. Enjoy it for what it is, a shoot 'em up action flick with a cast that looks to be having a lot of fun.

Olympus Has Fallen (2013): ***/****

The Maiden Heist

Originally intended for a theatrical release, 2009's The Maiden Heist had no such luck. Its studio went bankrupt before it could actually be released and never saw the light of day in theaters. Thankfully, it eventually found an audience (however small) on DVD. The end result? An enjoyable, pretty harmless comedy caper aided by a very talented cast.

Working as a security guard for a Boston art museum, Roger (Christopher Walken) has a bit of an obsession. He loves, loves a painting titled The Lonely Maiden, a picture of a woman looking off into the distance on a sandy beach. Now though, he's got a problem. Many pieces from the museum have been sold to another museum in Denmark, including The Lonely Maiden. Roger can't bear to imagine life without it, but he's not alone. Two other security guards, Charles (Morgan Freeman) and George (William H. Macy), similarly have fallen hard for two other pieces of art and don't want to see them go. What to do then? These three men who have always lived on the straight and narrow decide there's only one thing to do....steal the paintings for themselves. Can these three amateur crooks pull off the job?

This is a movie that's best watched on a rainy weekend afternoon when there's nothing better to do. It's funny but it isn't hilarious. It's goofy but not stupid...thankfully. The story takes some odd jumps in sequence that reflect a quasi-cheap feeling, making me think 'Heist' was a straight-to-DVD flick at first. It's apparent from the start how things will go. These three middle-aged to older men are all a little nuts, all a lot obsessed with paintings that strike them right down to their cores. How could three amateur crooks pull off the job? In the real world, no chance in hell. But it's a movie! In other words, you know they'll get away with it, overcoming all sorts of goofiness, misunderstandings, and general wackiness. Just sit back and enjoy. You won't strain yourself.

There's got to be a reason to see this flick though, and that's the cast. Surprising, huh? It would be very hard to put Walken, Freeman and Macy together in a movie and for it to not be worthwhile even a little. Walken is Walken, that kinda offbeat, schizo acting style highlighted by his especially unique speech patterns. Macy hams it up as George, the former Marine and veteran of the Grenada campaign. His art obsession? A sculpture of a nude Greek warrior. George strips down naked and poses next to it. Creepy? A little, but it's oddly funny. Middle-aged guy nudity played for a laugh too with some Macy butt scenes. I know, what Hollywood has been craving all these years! The best part is Freeman as Charles, a gay (I think?) security guard who can paint/draw/scribble his favorite painting with his eyes closed. It's his mannerisms, his speech, they all add up to some really funny lines and scenes as the trio of amateur crooks work together to pull off the job.

It is a heist movie -- however tame -- and that ends up being the best part of the movie. The build-up and intro takes about 45 minutes, and then we're off to the heist. The trio decides to pull the job during the move, replacing the originals with forgeries. Naturally, not everything goes as expected or planned, one thing after another coming up to throw them off their plan. There is a good twist late, but it doesn't come as a huge surprise by any means.

The laughs are there too, especially the opening scene as Walken's Roger daydreams about defending his painting from a heavily-armed team of mercenaries. Watch it HERE. A running gag about signing off a walky-talky with 'Roger...Roger' is funny if used too much, and a hypothetical walk-through of the museum (Charles constructs a scale version with a chess set and cereal boxes) produces some laughs. There's some odd moments too, like Breckin Meyer's one-scene appearance as a starving artist (maybe 90 seconds all told), and Marcia Gay Harden as Roger's shrill wife who wants a Florida vacation and accidentally threatens the heist. Pretty forgettable but still enjoyable enough. Worth a watch if nothing else, just don't expect a classic.

The Maiden Heist (2009): ** 1/2 /****

The Dark Knight Rises

Considering the quality of both Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, was there pressure for director Christopher Nolan to deliver an epic close-out film for his Batman trilogy? Reviews were somewhat mixed as Nolan's final Batman movie hit theaters last weekend, and the tragic shootings in Colorado will almost certainly hang over the film (to a point at least). If there was ever a case of ignoring reviews (other people's that is, I assume you'd take mine as the God honest truth), this is it. Not a surprise, but 2012's The Dark Knight Rises is a great film, one that gives the trilogy the send-off it deserves.

It has been eight years since Batman (Christian Bale) has taken the fall for Harvey Dent's murderous rampage, and Gotham City is better than ever. Crime has almost completely disappeared, and the city has experienced a rebirth of sorts. Hiding away at Wayne Manor, Batman/Bruce Wayne is wasting away, a recluse who hasn't appeared publicly for years. But when things seem just right -- even perfect -- for Gotham, a new terror arises, a madman in the form of mysterious and masked Bane (Tom Hardy), a criminal who vows to rock the foundation, destroying the city to rubble. Having questioned if everything/anything he ever did as Batman accomplished anything, Bruce must now decide what's best for Gotham. Let the city save itself? Or is the only thing stopping Bane the return of Batman?

First off, I have to say how impressed I was both with this final movie, but the trilogy on the whole. I rewatched the first two movies over the last week-plus before checking out 'Rises' and can very much recommend doing the same if you can. There's a continuity, a comfort level that permeates through an extended viewing of sorts. What can I say that I haven't in the other Batman reviews? Christopher Nolan is an immense talent, and I hope he continues to direct movies of this superb quality. The best description I can come up with to describe my enjoyment is hopefully simple to understand. You watch these movies -- 'Rises' especially -- and you just have that feeling you're watching what a movie should be. Not what it could be. SHOULD. Immensely entertaining, well-acted and well-written, an epic scale but also a connection on the personal level, spot-on soundtrack/musical score. Batman Begins started the ball rolling, The Dark Knight perfected the formula, and The Dark Knight Rises continues to use that formula.

What struck me most watching this newest arrival was the quality of drama here with kudos to a script from Nolan and Jonathan Nolan. I almost took it for granted, but over three movies, you honestly come to like/hate these characters, but if nothing else you get to know them. As pure drama, this is the best of the three films. It is by far the most personal of the three. Bale delivers his finest performance as the tortured Bruce Wayne, questioning what his actions accomplished while hiding away at Wayne Manor. This is an individual with inner demons that threaten to tear him apart. Buzz started circulating in the weeks prior to its release that Batman would die in this final installment (no finale spoilers here), and the darkness of the story reflects that. Batman has become the true tragic hero; an individual who genuinely wanted to do right but through his own fault, society, greed, and so many other things is forced to change, adapt and improvise. A credit to Bale for doing such a fine job with a character that could have easily been phoned in.

Using that as a jumping off point, Bale isn't on-screen for seemingly long stretches of the 164-minute movie. While Batman is the obvious key and focal point, this is also a story about the people of Gotham City. Michael Caine returns as Alfred, Bruce's butler, and hits every single note he can in a pitch-perfect performance. Three key scenes are the heart of the movie -- two with Bruce and Alfred, one with Alfred on his own -- and they are heartbreaking to watch. Didn't think you'd hear that in a Batman review, did you? Caine is so good I hope he gets some Oscar consideration for Best Supporting Actor. Gary Oldman rises to the occasion late as Commissioner Gordon, also questioning the actions he's taken and Morgan Freeman is solid as always as Wayne Enterprises engineering genius Lucius Fox. One other smaller new addition is Matthew Modine as one of Gordon's fellow high-ranking police officers.

Then there's the rest of the cast, Nolan seemingly trying to put together Inception 2: The Reckoning. Tom Hardy has some epic shoes to fill, following Heath Ledger's performance as The Joker, and he's quite capable of that. It's not fair to compare the part to the Joker, but there is similarities. Hardy's Bane is all business, all chaos, all anarchy. He's a bear of a man, like a caged but highly intelligent animal. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is a scene-stealer as John Blake, a Gotham police officer who grows increasingly frustrated with the limitations of his badge. Marion Cotillard plays Miriam Tate, a rich philanthropist trying to work with Wayne Enterprises to create a powerful sustainable energy force. Anne Hathaway holds her own as well, putting in a memorable turn as Selina Kyle, a master thief dubbed 'the Cat' but never actually dubbed Catwoman. SEMI SPOILERS ABOUT CASTING In the surprise department, look for Liam Neeson and Cillian Murphy briefly reprising their roles from the previous Batman entries. END OF SPOILERS A great cast though from top to bottom. 

Some reviews pointed to the rather twisty-turny early portions of the story as a detriment to the end result, and I go both ways here. Through the first hour, we're not always sure of what's going on or even where the story is heading. Characters and some background are introduced and dealt with, but it's all laying the groundwork. When the knock-out punch does come, all I can say...brace yourself. The final 45-60 minutes threw me for a loop, but in a good way. It is everything epic you would hope a final showdown to be; in this case, Bane turning Gotham City into a city cut off from the rest of the world and threatening to destroy it all, killing 12 million people in the process. If you struggle with the early pacing, stick with it. The pay-off in the end is incredibly worth it in so many ways.

As I mentioned, this is a movie that has it all. The finale packs the biggest action punch, but an earlier motorcycle chase through the city following a Bane robbery is also highly memorable, as is Bane's takeover of the city with an abundance of explosives taking out bridges and even a quasi-NFL game. The dialogue is spot-on too, especially the scenes with Bale and Caine. On pure drama, it's hard to beat Bane's backstory (quick though it is), but also how Batman deals with solving the identical problem the mysteriously masked villain had to figure out. And then there's the ending. Should it come as a surprise that it is basically the perfect way to close out the trilogy? Hans Zimmer's musical score is solid throughout, but it's at its best in the final montage as everything is wrapped up. Two different twists make the ending a little surprising, but mostly? It's an appropriate dramatic and emotional ending for all involved.

Well, here we are. I'm sorry to see this trilogy go. As far as superhero movies go (and I struggle limiting these to just superhero movies), they've set the bar as high as they can. All other future efforts will be compared to these films, and I can't think of a better compliment to a director, cast and crew for turning out such a quality finished product. A classic on par with The Dark Knight, if not a slightly, tiny bit better.

The Dark Knight Rises <---trailer (2012): ****/****

The Dark Knight

Why are people so excited for this weekend's The Dark Knight Rises? Because Batman Begins was good, and 2008's The Dark Knight was great, setting the bar about as high as a movie can possibly go. The rare sequel that improves on the original, it is everything you would hope for in a superhero movie and much, much more. Just a little more timely reviewing today, and I hope to see 'Rises' Sunday so expect a review soon.

Helping clean up Gotham City and all its crime, the very mention of the name 'Batman' sends shivers up the spines of Gotham's criminal underworld. But for all Batman (Christian Bale) has done, he's never fought a criminal quite like this one, the Joker (Heath Ledger), a deranged murderer who wears faded, unkempt make-up and favors knives. The Joker has offered his services to the all the different heads of the criminal underworld, offering to kill the Batman and make their lives infinitely easier. The Caped Crusader might finally have some help though in Gotham's hierarchy as crusading district attorney Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart) vows to help Batman however he can. With a nut like the Joker around, nothing happens as expected.  

It's hard -- and probably not very fair -- to compare this second Batman movie from director Christopher Nolan to its predecessor. 'Begins' is an above average, highly enjoyable movie on its own, but it is merely one that opens the door for all that Nolan had planned with this sequel. 'Begins' introduces the Batman lore, the characters, the situations, laying the groundwork. 'Knight' takes the jumping off point and sprints with it. Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard's score is again booming and epic and just right. Almost the entire film was filmed in Chicago, and the movie looks AMAZING. Talk about a director utilizing his locations, Nolan knocks that one out of the park. It's the little things that start things rolling, and the movie never looks back.

But what really sets Nolan's movies apart from even the high quality superhero movies -- The Avengers, Iron Man, Captain America -- is the inherent darkness involved with the characters and story. There is no camp quality to the proceedings, no tongue in cheek humor. This is a cutthroat world where anyone and everyone is potentially dead in a flash. The word that comes to mind watching this movie was 'brutal.' More on this later, but much of that comes from the performance of Heath Ledger. His Joker is a villain described by Michael Caine's Alfred as someone "who wants to watch the world burn." There is no rhyme or reason to the Joker's brutality. He encourages murder (and handles a couple of his own), mayhem and chaos and doesn't care who gets caught up in the maelstrom that ensues. As a fan of a darker, graphic novel look at a "comic book" world, that darkness and brutality appeals to me in movies. Nolan commits to that deep-seeded darkness and never lets up.

Now onto Heath Ledger as the Joker. This movie was in the news prior to its release (more in the news at least) because Ledger died six months before the film's release. Before it had even been seen, buzz was generated about Ledger's amazingly memorable performance as the Joker, and when audiences finally saw this movie in the summer of 2008, they weren't disappointed. In a performance that won him a Best Supporting Actor Oscar, Ledger delivers a performance that is terrifying, supremely dark, oddly charming and unlike any other villainous role ever. It's his voice, his speech, his peculiar mannerisms, his maniacal laughing, the distinctly iconic look with the faded, dreary make-up and purple suit, all these specific things that make this such a memorable and ultimately tragic performance.

Because Ledger's part was rightly given so much attention upon release, the rest of the cast doesn't always get the recognition they deserve. Other than developing that overly deep "I'm BATMAN!" voice since 'Begins,' Bale tweaks the character for the positive. He begins to question what he's taken upon his shoulder. He begins to doubt if he can actually win in the end, especially with a counter like the Joker. Eckhart too is a scene-stealer as Harvey Dent, the crusading district attorney who takes a no-nonsense approach to everything about his job. An idealist who wants the best, he's also a frustrated realist kept in check to a point by the system. Caine again is perfect as Alfred, Morgan Freeman returns as Wayne Enterprises resident genius Lucius Fox, and Gary Oldman gets much more to do as Lt. Gordon. Even Cillian Murphy makes a one-scene appearance as the Scarecrow. Additions include Maggie Gyllenhaal as Rachel Dawes (an improvement over Katie Holmes), Eric Roberts as Maroni, a powerful Gotham mobster, and Nestor Carbonell as the mayor of Gotham.

Like any classic, something has to set a movie apart from the average. The Chicago locations help that cause, especially an epic action sequence on La Salle Street and Lower Wacker Drive as Batman -- on a Bat-cycle of sorts -- does battle with the Joker who at different points has an automatic machine gun, bazooka and out of control semi trucks as weapons. There are the smaller but equally memorable moments, especially the Joker's infamous "pencil disappearing trick." The finale is the best though as the Joker's chaotic plan is revealed in all its cynical, brutal qualities. The final scene propels this 2008 movie into the trilogy wrap-up, Oldman's Lt. (now Commissioner as we all know him) Gordon delivering a monologue that is perfect in its simple, straightforward, forthrightness. Is that even a word? Eh. The movie is great, one all other superhero movies must measure themselves against. As for me, I'm counting down the hours until The Dark Knight Rises.

The Dark Knight <---trailer (2008): ****/****

Batman Begins

Here at Just Hit Play, I try to be timely if nothing else. So with the huge-mega-ultra-gigantic-Titanic-epic summer blockbuster (<----intended seriously, not sarcasm) The Dark Knight Rises due in theaters this Friday, we're doing a little movie recapping, starting with 2005's Batman Begins, director Christopher Nolan's first venture into the Batman series. This weekend's film will no doubt be a huge success, but that's only because Nolan set the bar so high with his first two entries, and this first one? Still a goodie.

Years since his parents were murdered in a robbery, Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) is still searching for answers; some kind of resolution for his feelings of guilt, fear and desire for vengeance. After traveling the world and even training with a mysterious warrior, Ducard (Liam Neeson), at an isolated monastery in the Himalayas. Returning to impoverished, crime-torn Gotham City, Bruce creates a crime-fighting identity -- Batman -- to help combat the city's problems, using everything from Wayne Enterprises (his deceased father's company) to aid the cause. His impact is immediate, but other more sinister personalities await, including Dr. Crane (Cillian Murphy) who intends to cripple Gotham like nothing the city's seen before.

The superhero franchise reboot is nothing new recently. Over the last 15 years, Superman, Spiderman and Batman have gotten reboots with a long list of other superheroes getting their own chance at a franchise -- some more successful than others. What sets 'Begin' (and The Dark Knight) apart is a straightforward authentic feel. There is no tongue in cheek, campy angle to the superhero proceedings. That's not a bad thing in the least. Nolan takes what Batman fans know -- Alfred the butler, the Batmobile, the Bat cave, Detective Gordon -- and keeps it on the straight and narrow. The score from Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard is epic without being overdoing it -- listen to the main theme HERE -- and the scale of the story has that epic quality without losing focus on the personal aspect; the characters. Simple you would think, but it's always surprising how many movies forget about that aspect.

What has made these movies so popular though -- for me at least -- is they are dark, dark and DARK. Like I mentioned, many people know Batman through the campy 1960s TV show or even the 1990s franchise ventures which we won't address right now....maybe ever. Unfortunately, the Batman comics are cynical and did I mention, dark? The TV shows and movies never took advantage of that aspect until here. Gotham City has been polluted by crime, poverty and corruption throughout the government (Tom Wilkinson is great in a small part as mobster Carmine Falcone), the city literally being torn apart. In general, Nolan (who also co-wrote the script) doesn't seem interested in any obvious laughs or tongue-in-cheek quality. Bad guys and good guys in a city in squalor. This would obviously get ratcheted up a notch in The Dark Knight, but 'Begins' certainly gets the ball rolling.

Having worked in film and TV since the late 1980s, Christian Bale had been at least a somewhat recognizable name for years. Not surprisingly, this put on the A-list of movie stars. Playing instantly recognizable superheroes tends to do that, huh? I like Bale as an actor, but he makes Bruce Wayne/Batman a likable character from the start. A superhero is one thing, but a tortured superhero? That's money in the bank. He has no super powers -- just a mansion and secret cave full of badass gadgets -- and must rely on his own skills as a fighter when trouble arises. Because of his past though, Bruce blames himself for his parents' death and feels he must do something to right that wrong. Without the humor of Robert Downey Jr. in Iron Man, Bale does a great job at putting a new, entertaining spin on a character that just about everyone knows.

Now on the other hand, if you're not a Bale fan, this cast almost certainly has something else to offer you. If there is a better casting job than Michael Caine as Alfred, Bruce's butler at Wayne Manor, I can't think of him. Caine is a professional, and even with his supporting part manages to dominate his scenes, making it look easy in the process. Same goes for Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox, Wayne Enterprise's resident technological genius. Gary Oldman is limited by screentime as Jim Gordon, one of Gotham's few clean cops, but not surprisingly makes it worthwhile. Neeson as Ducard is a gem in the casting department, Murphy sinister and creepy as Dr. Crane/Scarecrow, and Ken Watanabe as mysterious ninja Ra's Al Ghul is only around for a little. Rutger Hauer plays Earle, the CEO of Wayne Enterprises in Bruce's absence, Katie Holmes is Rachel, Bruce's long-time but secret love and an assistant D.A., and Linus Roache plays Thomas Wayne, Bruce's brilliant, philanthropic father in a few quick flashback scenes.

It is a Batman movie though so there is some just assumed badass-ness (real word?) because of the character. The action scenes are brutal and don't feel forced, quick cut without being an indecipherable blur. Fans of Batman will no doubt get a kick out of seeing the reveal of the Bat Signal, of the Batmobile zipping through Gotham, all those little things that help make a good character great. 'Begins' sets the bar pretty high, but not quite high enough. As good as it is, it merely set the stage for The Dark Knight, an instant classic. Just the same, it's a great place to start. And don't forget about that last scene before the credits, featuring a perfect lead-in to the sequel. Superhero origin stories can be tricky, but this one knocks it out of the park.

Batman Begins <---trailer (2005): *** 1/2 /****