Pay It Forward - 6 stars out of 10

Pay It Forward - 6 stars out of 10

“Pay It Forward” is the story of a boy’s extra credit assignment to make the world a better place and the people who are touched by it.  It sounds cheesy but the dramatic execution of this simple concept is enjoyable (a little farfetched, but enjoyable).  It doesn’t hurt that it employs the dynamic cast of Kevin Spacey, Helen Hunt, Haley Joel Osment, and Jim Caviezel.  It also doesn’t hurt that it has a whimsical score by Thomas Newman and generates a great deal of emotion with its ending.  It touches on real-world themes like alcoholism, divorce, domestic abuse, and bullying so that all audience members can relate in one way or another.  Spacey is as good as ever with this role that allows him to play both an inspirational teacher and a fragile, abused man.  Caviezel is the other actor that stands out as really delivering his emotions.  Osment again proves his ability to act as well as the adults and Hunt plays her vulnerable role well.   It is a well-written story as the lives of these unrelated characters converge because of a single boy’s dream.  “Pay It Forward” is pretty straightforward but there are a few surprises and emotional monologues that set this one apart from Lifetime original movies.

[Pictured: If nothing else, you will walk away from this film wanting to pay it forward to three people]

The Hunted (2003) - 3 stars out of 10

The Hunted (2003) - 3 stars out of 10

“The Hunted” is nearly an epic showdown between master and student.  The only problem is that it doesn’t really do anything.  The film is essentially a war sequence, two extended chase sequences, and a final showdown.  That's the entire movie.  The plot is a bit confused.  I’m not sure if there were issues behind the scenes or changes in the scriptwriting department, but there is a disconnect within the story.  They stumble onto an interesting theme as the main character targets hunters who use unethical advantages to kill animals.  This combined with the psychological effects of military service could have made for an amazing story.  Then they completely abandon both premises halfway through and never mention them again.  Tommy Lee Jones and Benicio del Toro play their roles well in spite of the script.  Outside of the story, the chase scenes are cool as each meeting of the main characters is filled with unusually realistic hand-to-hand combat and an unnecessarily grotesque amount of blood.  If you want to experience the story but can't handle blood, don't even bother with this one.  There's more blood spatter than a Tarantino film.  The outdoorsy atmosphere is interesting but overdone.  It’s kind of like “Rambo,” only not good.  “The Hunted” is good for its realistic hand-to-hand combat but outside of this, there are many better films in this genre.

[Pictured: The military training flashback is cool but is one of the only portions that is worth watching]

The Greatest Show on Earth - 5 stars out of 10

The Greatest Show on Earth - 5 stars out of 10

“The Greatest Show on Earth” is often considered to be one of the worst films to win the Best Picture Oscar.  I found much of the film to be above that categorization.  I also found many of director Cecil B. Demille’s decisions about the format of the film and length of sequences to be questionable.  It is basically half-feature film and half-documentary.  Its "cast" includes the 1400-member crew of the 1951 Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey's Circus with much of the film's footage shot during the actual set-up, tear down, and performances of this crew.  I love that the film preserves the legacy of performers like Emmett Kelly as the sad hobo clown "Weary Willie" and famed circus band leader Merle Evans, as well as the exciting atmosphere surrounding the circus that has faded with each new generation.  One of the most interesting segments of the film is pure documentary with an in depth look at the set-up of the circus tent.  It has nothing to do with the plot but it's fascinating.  Still, it doesn’t fit with the actual storylines of the film.  Some of the circus sequences go on for way too long.  I understand that the inclusion for the real Barnum and Bailey performers is what makes this an epic, but it is never good when 20 minutes goes by without any story.  All of the non-circus actors do a good job of bringing their characters to life within the circus atmosphere.  Charlton Heston, Betty Hutton, Cornel Wilde, and Gloria Grahame all have nice performances but we forget that during the long tangents away from the plot.  The final 20 minutes is cinema at its finest.  The mystery behind Jimmy Stewart's character and his acting in the final moments are the film's saving grace.  Many have criticized this film for not deserving to win the Oscar for Best Picture but this is the portion of the film that they should be praising.  I believe that the film could have cut 30 minutes of material to make the story feel more consistent and still maintained its epic stature.  “The Greatest Show on Earth” will always be remembered in infamy but it is a film that every movie fan should see, even just for the final 20 minutes.

[Pictured: I don’t like clowns but Jimmy Stewart manages to make “Buttons” a likable character]

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story - 10 stars out of 10

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story - 10 stars out of 10

For 39 years, “Star Wars” fans have been curious about the events leading up to Episode IV.  We have become accustomed to the opening of “A New Hope” since most of us have seen it at least a dozen times, but it is actually rather perplexing.  Who would ever expect the most popular movie franchise of all time to begin with a written synopsis of an event from a non-existent movie, and then drop us into the middle of the event’s ensuing battle scene as if we missed the first half of it?  The abrasiveness has always made the opening feel incomplete to me but now the franchise has bridged the gap.  “Rogue One” actually completes Episode IV.  This is one of the smartest movie concepts that I have ever seen, particularly after so many years of wondering what happened in the Rebel spies’ mission to steal the Death Star plans.  I believe that the future of Star Wars lies in the expansion of its universe through this Anthology series.  It allows Lucasfilm (aka Disney) to continue the story for a new generation through Episodes VII, VIII, and IX while fleshing out the universe familiar to previous generations of Star Wars fans.  This strategy is the perfect combination of innovation and nostalgia.  Unlike the prequel trilogy, this film was done right.  There is an emphasis on quality acting, the special effects never feel like a video game, and the new characters have depth.  Honestly, the most important part of this film was the casting of Oscar-nominee Felicity Jones.  She puts this entire film on her shoulders and carries it from start to finish.  She delivers an emotional performance that is on par with any critically acclaimed drama while embodying the hope and heroism at the heart of the Star Wars franchise.  She is surrounded by quality actors including “Ip Man’s” Donnie Yen as the blind Chirrut Îmwe.  I consider him to be one of the best Star Wars characters in the galaxy with his unwavering faith in the force to protect him in battle.  Mads Mikkelsen is fantastic as Galen Erso, Forest Whitaker provides a familiar face, and it was magic to hear James Earl Jones reprise his role as Darth Vader’s voice.  I had heard that this film was significantly darker than the rest of the series and lacked the humor that we love to see between Han and Chewie, but I thought that some of the best comedy that I’ve seen in the entire series occured between Cassian and K-2SO.  Alan Tudyk puts on an awesome motion-capture performance as this robot.  One of the larger controversies of this film was the CGI recreation of the late Peter Cushing but I am fine with it.  The Cushing estate gave permission, they were included in the process and consulted down to the tiniest details of his mannerisms, and I view it as a tribute to make him such an important part of this story.  Creativity abounds in this film through the costuming, new alien beings, inclusion of similar-but-different characters as a throwback to the originals (like General Akbar’s relative), and brilliant new destinations.  The entire sequence on Scariff is incredibly beautiful, especially with the giant AT-ACT’s walking around.  I appreciate the inclusion of the names of each planet and moon as they travel throughout the galaxy.  Die-hard Star Wars fans know the name of every planet and its significance to the Empire or the Rebellion, but for everyone else it is helpful to have that clarification as the movie progresses.  I had a tough time accepting Michael Giacchino’s new theme.  There are many parts of this score that I completely loved but I found an abrupt disappointment each time that I heard the Rogue One theme.  Throughout the film, Giacchino pays tribute to John Williams’ original thematic material including The Force Theme and The Imperial March.  The results are stunning, until we hear this new theme.  We have been conditioned to expect the Star Wars theme any time that we hear an ascending sol-do-sol pattern, regardless of the style or genre of the music.  The problem is that, as a tribute, Giacchino used this same pattern to begin the Rogue One theme.  Each time that we hear those ascending tones, we anticipate the original theme and are let down when it is different.  The shame is that the Rogue One theme is absolutely gorgeous with its inclusion of an ascending minor 6th and then a Lydian-sounding resolution on the IV chord (ti resolving to do), but it is overshadowed because it isn’t the original.  I know that this theme will grow on me as I get used to it but it was distracting the first time around.  If you couldn’t tell, I loved this film and the writers saved the greatest movie magic for the end.  I won’t spoil anything but the final five minutes of this film will transport you back to your first time seeing “Star Wars.”  The previews for “Rogue One” created high expectations and I am glad to see that the producers have found a way to transport us back to the Star Wars universe that we grew up with while maintaining the quality of Episodes IV-VII.  I can’t wait to see what they create next!

[Pictured: The writers did a great job of creating new characters that feel familiar and quickly win over our hearts]

Kingpin (1996) - 2 stars out of 10

Kingpin (1996) - 2 stars out of 10

“Kingpin” is a goofball comedy that isn’t very funny.  I know that it is a well-known fact that you can put Bill Murray into any comedy with a supporting role and his humor will immediately elevate the film, but even that couldn’t save this one.  As a last ditch effort, they featured Blues Traveler dressed in Amish garb during the closing credits song… These are the sorts of things that you can expect to find in “Kingpin.”  Rule number one of goofball comedies: if you make them too vulgar or too mean-spirited, their tone will be completely off.  This is the main issue with the “Hangover” series.  There comes a point where you feel so bad for the characters that you can’t laugh at their misfortune.  This film strikes that note in the first 15 minutes when the main character loses his bowling hand.  I realize that the story is contingent on this event, but they don’t have to smash windshields and aggressively thrust a man’s hand into a bowling ball return.  Woody Harrelson is okay (but definitely not close to his best), Randy Quaid is alright (but not as good as his typical character roles), and the rest of the cast don’t offer much either.  “Kingpin” was a waste of time and I’m going to stick with “Dumb & Dumber” the next time that I want to watch a brainless comedy by The Ferrelly Brothers.

[Pictured: Bill Murray running around with Woody Harrelson’s fake hand is one of the more normal things to happen in this odd film]

Cinderella Man - 9 stars out of 10

Cinderella Man - 9 stars out of 10

“Cinderella Man” tells the redemptive story of depression-era boxer James J. Braddock.  This story works on two levels.  First, Braddock as a man who struggles to provide from his family when The Great Depression limits the number of jobs for working class men.  Second, Braddock as a symbol of hope for all Americans who are struggling to get by.  Director Ron Howard brings both of these levels together in this period drama.  There has been criticism that Max Baer is inaccurately depicted as vicious bully.  While he was known to be a gentleman outside of the ring, this depiction personifies the brute that he became inside of the ring; moreover, Baer is an important part of the film’s symbolism as the American people must “get into the ring” with their hardships if they want to reverse their desperate situations.  The period costumes and atmosphere are an important part of this film but the key to its success is Russell Crowe.  He provides the emotions, expression, and believable boxing abilities necessary to connect with the audience as both a father and as a boxer.  The other X-factor of this film is Paul Giamatti whose portrayal of manager Joe Gould was rightfully rewarded with an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor.  Giamatti is one of my favorite character actors and he brings an incredible amount of heart to this performance.  I was rather unimpressed with Renée Zellweger as Braddock’s wife.  She was an Oscar nominee three years in a row (including a win for “Cold Mountain”) so I always have high expectations, but I found that most of the emotion in her scenes were a result of Crowe’s acting and not her own.  Everything is tied together by a beautiful score by Thomas Newman that keeps us focused on the heart of the story.  This heart of the story is the hopes and dreams of America which seemingly all lay on the success of Braddock, though it also works as a great boxing film.  The scenes are cut in a fast-paced yet easy to follow manner, which probably accounts of the Best Editing Oscar nomination.  “Cinderella Man” is a solid picture that will please a diverse grouping of audience members.  This is a great choice whether you are feeling down and looking for inspiration or simply in the mood to experience some American history.

[Pictured: Giamatti and Crowe make a great pair in this inspirational sports drama]

16 Blocks - 5 stars out of 10

16 Blocks - 5 stars out of 10

“16 Blocks” is an adrenaline-pumping action film that is unique because of its plot and real time storytelling.  It becomes predictable after it reveals the big twist 30 minutes into the movie, but it still gives us everything that we want in a Bruce Willis film where he faces impossible odds so that justice can be served.  I have always loved the concept: Transport a criminal through New York City to the courthouse that is 16 blocks away while the enemy tries to take you down.  At points, it seems like the concept is better than the execution.  I appreciate that the writers try to go beyond your typical action flick by incorporating a down-on-his-luck-alcoholic-transforms-into-a-hero storyline; however, it comes off as overdramatic.  I don’t know if it is because of the acting, the sometimes cheesy musical score, or Willis’ creeper mustache, but it seemed out of place amongst the action.  Meanwhile, Mos Def steals the show as the likable criminal, Eddie.  His nasal manner of speaking helps us to view him as a victim instead of a criminal which creates the empathy that drives the story.  David Morse makes an excellent villain, especially because we can easily view him as a good guy and a bad guy at the same time.  “16 Blocks” contains plenty of farfetched moments but you’re probably watching this for the action sequences and not the realism of the story.

[Pictured: Mos Def is great, Willis' mustache is disconcerting]