Fantastic Four (2015)

Summary
A contemporary re-imagining of Marvel's original and longest-running superhero team, centers on four young outsiders who teleport to an alternate and dangerous universe, which alters their physical form in shocking ways. Their lives irrevocably upended, the team must learn to harness their daunting new abilities and work together to save Earth from a former friend turned enemy.

Genre : SF
Country : USA

Cast :
Miles Teller : Reed Richards
Kate Mara : Sue Storm
Michael B. Jordan : Johnny Storm

Director : Josh Trank

My opinion 

"Where'd the rocks come from?
From the same place the car went to.
Where is that?
I don't know yet."

 

During my youth I spent many hours next door with the neighbor boy. Not just for having fun or horsing around, but also because in their veranda there was a disused closet with sliding doors where you could always find some old comics lying around. I suppose these were from the older brother who was a real comic fan. Many hours I spent sitting in front of that closet, reading them all. Comics like "Archie the man of steel", DC comics and of course Marvel. My favorite was "The Fantastic Four". This series I found extremely fascinating and that because it was a collective, consisting of several superheroes with different super powers. They formed a close-knit family and their identity was known to the population so these heroes had a rather family character. Actually, they were a little bit the forerunners of "The Avengers" and the figure of "The Hulk" resembled that of Ben.

Unfortunately, this film is labeled as an unnecessary and worthless reboot. I partially agree with that. The only thing is that I can't judge whether this is an unnecessary reboot or not. I've never seen the previous films made in 1994 and 2005. Saying this is a failure or total disaster though, is something I don't fully agree with. A big part of the film I enjoyed watching and personally I thought it was interesting enough. The introduction of the various members of the unprecedented four was extremely captivating. The beginning showed a young Reed Richards (Judge Owen). A genius who seemed to come from Mars, according to some of his classmates, and who's building a futuristic machine in the garage. A missing component he finds on a junkyard where he bumps into young Ben Grimm (Evan Hannemann). The experiment proves to be a success and things can be materialized to an unknown destination and brought back again. Years later Reed (Miles Teller) and Ben (Jamie Bell) attend a science fair, where they attract the attention of Dr. Storm (Reg E. Cathey) and his daughter Sue (Kate Mara). And before they know it, they are in a sophisticated lab rebuilding their invention on a large scale.

This introduction was the most successful part for me. It felt like an adventure film in which a boy pursues the realization of a dream. In an amateurish and childish way, the prototype of something big is made out of junk (a bit like in "Project Almanac"). Also the introduction to the various members who become part of "The Fantastic Four" in the Baxter Foundation, made this film different of other superhero movies. Mostly this part is kept short so they can move on to the action part immediately. The moment things start going wrong with the four noticing something happened to their bodies after they've jumped to the other dimension (while being drunk), it's still interesting enough. You witness how each of them discover their new capacities. But when the action-packed part of the film starts, it's no longer fantastic. It turns into an uninspired, quickly made up heroes-movie. As if they suddenly realized that stuff should be in it too. The visuals of the other dimension are still enjoyable, but the final stage feels rather flat and not very original. And certainly because nowadays as a moviegoer, you're burried under tons of superhero-movies.

Ultimately, this film emphasizes the formation of and relationships between the members of "The Fantastic Four". The superhero action that you ultimately expect, is fairly limited. A film that takes 90 minutes, with only a demonstration of superpowers and a final clash of fifteen minutes, can hardly be seen as a superhero movie. Perhaps this change was welcome anyway, after all the Marvel releases in recent years. The fatigue comes into play when it's about this genre. Perhaps the final part of the movie wasn't so great, but it wasn't painfully bad either. And now I'll just wait for "Deadpool" ....

My rating 5/10
Links : IMDB

Extraction (2015)

Summary :
Harry Turner works for the CIA like his father Leonard. He wants to do fieldwork but he's constantly being denied. He's stationed in Prague and his father's good friend keeps an eye on him. Later they receive word that Leonard, who was in New Jersey making sure a piece of hardware called Condor arrives, that Leonard and the Condor's been taken. The Director tries to find it and Harry wants to help but won't let him. So he bolts and goes to New Jersey. The director decides to let one of their agents who is Harry's ex to find Leonard and the Condor.

Genre : Thriller
Country : Canada

Cast :
Kellan Lutz : Harry Lutz
Bruce Willis : Leonard Lutz
Gina Carano : Victoria

Director : Steven C. Miller

My opinion   

The makers of "Extraction" use the same marketing gimmick as used in films such as "The Cold Light of Day", "Fire with Fire", "The Prince" and "Vice". It's the famous Bruce Willis magic trick. Actually, it's dead simple. Make sure this star actor of yesteryear (I have to say I was always a big fan of BW) participates in an upcoming B-movie. However, the length of time you can admire him is limited and his presence is evenly spaced. You let him turn up at the beginning of the movie as an appetizer and give the impression that this might be a real Willis movie once again. Eventually, he disappears for most of the film and pops up again in the end for the big reveal. Then place him centrally on the cover so future viewers will get the feeling that he's playing an important part in it. I'm convinced that this is the biggest marketing trick that ensures the necessary revenues. As a viewer, you feel cheated though.

 

Yep. The "Die Hard" star adds just another B-movie to his record of achievements. I must admit that the beginning of the film provided a momentary enthusiasm. For a moment, I had a feeling the old Bruce Willis was back and I was getting ready for some cool one-liners and beaten up opponents. Yippie kai yee! The result was a short-lived excitement, because before you know it the Willis marketing trick reveals itself and he disappears like a white rabbit during that well-known magic trick. Not in a black hat, but in the murky world of terrorists who captured a device called CONDOR. When activating this device, telecommunications will be disabled worldwide. Or something like that.

Time for Kellan Lutz to show up. He plays Harry Turner, a CIA analyst who would love to follow in the footsteps of his father, but his application is always refused by the respective services. Until the day comes when someone kidnaps his father Leonard (Bruce Willis). Despite the explicit prohibition of his superiors to get involved, he still heads out to defuse that CONDOR. And this with the help of this other field agent Victoria (Gina Carano). And what a surprise, she's someone Kellan had a brief relationship with before. Who would have thought of that? What follows is just a cheap Secret Service action movie with the necessary fight scenes. And with of course the obligatory locations such as a biker bar (starring some billiard balls and a broken jukebox) and a trendy nightclub. Carano showed already in "In the Blood" that she can stand her ground in such dark clubs.

The story brings nothing new and is full of familiar clichés. Even the denouement at the end was predictable. Not quite a good movie, you might say. The same can be said of the performances. Willis plays another comatose role and looks quite pathetic and uninterested in the few moments when he's on screen. Lutz and Carano make the best out of it and during the action scenes, the entertainment level rose a bit. And then there's the fact that Carano's curves are certainly a feast for the eye. I wouldn't date her though. Not with this testosterone-filled chunk of energy. Before you know it, you're stuck in a stranglehold that can be fatal. For now I've lost all hope for another brilliant Bruce Willis movie. Yippie ka ... yeah yeah yeah!

My rating 4/10
Links : IMDB

Hitman : Agent 47 (2015)

Summary :
Agent 47 is an elite assassin who was genetically engineered from conception to be the perfect killing machine, and is known only by the last two digits on the barcode tattooed on the back of his neck. He is the culmination of decades of research and forty-six earlier Agent clones -- endowing him with unprecedented strength, speed, stamina and intelligence. His latest target is a mega-corporation that plans to unlock the secret of Agent 47's past to create an army of killers whose powers surpass even his own. 

Genre : Action
Country : USA/Germany/Singapore

Cast :
Rupert Friend : Agent 47
Zachary Quinto : John Smith
Hannah Ware : Katia

Director : Aleksander Bachavid Ryan Keith

My opinion    

"We determine who we are by what we do."

Before, when I had no responsibilities and enough time in the evening, I was hopelessly addicted to playing video games. Many hours I spent behind my monitor slogging myself through all sorts of levels. Wondering what would follow. I had this relentless drive to improve myself on all fronts. Nowadays, I can't bring myself to stare at a screen for hours as an addict. On the one hand I don't have the time anymore and on the other hand I don't feel like doing that anymore. But I do get excited everytime there's an attempt to make a film adaptation of a videogame. The meager attempts there have been to date (and somewhat successful in my opinion) are for me the "Tomb Raider" and "Resident Evil" franchise. But still there's something subtle missing in those movies when you compare them with their console version. Perhaps it's because you don't have control over it and must undergo it. Perhaps the reason is plain simple. Maybe video games aren't suitable for screen adaptations.

What about this Hitman film? Unfortunately, I haven't seen the original film from 2007. So I have no clue how bad or good that was. And I don't know what comparables there are with this version of "Hitman : Agent 47". Agent 47 (Rupert Friend) is a cold-blooded, dispassionate secret agent who is a kind of reincarnation of Neo, mixed with John Wick and "The Equalizer". Fearless, intelligent, very fast and deadly. On the cover you see a bald, unemotional man in a sleek black suit and a red tie, holding two dangerous looking guns. A genetically engineered assassin,  originating from the laboratory of Dr. Pitor Litvenko (Ciaran Hinds). Apparently everybody is looking for Litvenko. But all have their own reasons to find him. Agent 47 is looking for the abandoned daughter Katia (Hannah Ware). His task is to eliminate her, so that the "Syndicate International" can't use her to track Litvenko. This organization wants to restart the Agent program.

"Hitman: Agent 47" is nothing more than a series of action-packed scenes full of meaningless violent confrontations with a rather weak storyline. The violence is abundant and waves of extreme skirmishes hit you continuously. At those moments you'll witness the superhuman features like for instance a subdermal titanium body armor (yep). In addition, there's excessive use of slow-motion effects. Not exactly innovative. So don't expect a complicated story. It's all pretty predictable and simplistic. You can't say the dialogues are intelligent or interesting.The characters can be seen as very sterile. But claiming Rupert Friend just shows a total lack of emotion and nothing else, is kind of ridiculous, since this is a key feature of Agent 47. This manipulated agent can't comprehend the concept of emotions.

Hitman provides amusement and brings mindless entertainment, but as a whole it's anything but a real hit.

 

My rating 5/10
Links : IMDB

The Redwood Massacre (2014)

Summary :
For five adventurous friends, visiting the legendary murder site of the Redwood House has all the hallmarks of being an exciting and thrilling camping weekend away. A popular site for revellers and party goers, each year on the exact date of the famous local family massacre, people from around the country head out to the site to have fun and scare each other. Events take a bloody turn for the worse when the innocent campers discover the Redwood legend is in fact a horrible bloody reality.

Genre : Horror
Country : UK

Cast :
Benjamin Selway : Evil Highlander
Lisa Cameron : Pamela
Lisa Livingstone : Kirsty

Director : David Ryan Keith

My opinion   

The only thing I'll remember from this movie are the most ridiculous and bizarre eyebrows on the forehead of a member of the group who are doomed to be slashed. As for the rest, "The Redwood Massacre" is a slasher film that adds nothing new to the slasher genre. The 80's were the era of gory slasher films with of course "Halloween", "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" and "Friday the 13th". Jason Voorhees hid his face behind a hockey mask. Michael Myers used a white mask. Leatherface used the skin of his victims. In this film the Scottish bloodthirsty killer came up with the brilliant idea to use a potato sack. Is this killer the crazy farmer who massacred his family? Or is it the buried and afterwards missing farmer's son? That's not entirely clear. And you shouldn't expect a statement from the wildly chopping killer, because throughout the whole movie, no sensible word comes out of his mouth.

I know slasher movies aren't famous for their sophisticated storylines (although the first Friday the 13th was a bit more than just simply slaughtering teenagers) and Oscar worthy performances. Ultimately, the starting point of such films is showing disgusting, sickeningly images such as cutting up unfortunate, innocent campers. Liters of blood flowing at that time is a logical consequence. In "The Redwood Massacre" they probably received remains of blood from other slasher films because the way blood is gushing here, you won't see anywhere else in your lifetime. So excessive, that it gets downright ridiculous. A hefty punch already ensures gushes of blood splashing in all directions, as if a number of main arteries are being sliced. A firm nosebleed results in blood-soaked clothes and hair. As if, just like in "Carrie", a bucket of pig's blood is thrown on them.

Among the group of youngsters once again the same characters occur. Obviously, there's a spoiled bitch (Lisa Livingstone as Kirsty) who actually does nothing but complain all the time and clearly didn't want to participate in this venture. It amazed me that she didn't start to discuss with the serial killer about the fact that he probably used the wrong laundry detergent, since there are still bloodstains visible on his lumberjack shirt. Then there's the characterless masculine part. Their only function is being part of the company and being transported to the slaughterhouse. There's also the party-girl Rebecca (Rebecca Wilkie) who, as I mentioned earlier, only stands out because of her ridiculous eyebrows. And finally there's Pamela (Lisa Cameron). Perhaps the most down-to-earth member of the whole group and waiting for her boyfriend. The latter apparently got lost and wanders through the woods. Getting lost is apparently a habit in those Scottish forests, because the so-called party in the ruins of Redwood turns out to be rather lifeless without the other partygoers . Also lost? Or worse?

 

The pace of this brutal slasher is damn high. The opening scene immediately shows a horrific murder. The sadistic brute is revealed in closeup the first moment. I guess the writers decided not to be too mysterious about that. And before you know it a couple camping somewhere in the woods, a lost mountain biker and two members of the group disappear and are being chopped into pieces. The massacres are brutal, gory, sadistic and sickening. What do you expect from a straight-in-your-face slasher?

And yet this film isn't exactly excellent. The dialogues are totally ridiculous. The characters are highly irritating and extremely stupid. Eventually they deserve to end like filet Americain. The bloody scenes are excessively bloody. At times it seemed as if it was engine oil dripping from the victims. Stupidities pass the whole time. The bloodthirsty killer could hear the slightest sound. But two people talking to eachother was beyond his hearing spectrum. Certain developments seemed utter stupid like for instance the disappearance of two group members overnight. This was so abruptly and without explanation. As if they forgot to include it in the film. The history of the serial killer remained vague. And finally, there was also a completely useless character in the form of the father of a murdered teenager. His contribution to the whole was banal and his reaction to Pamela was bizarre. And how the hell can you drive in circles when there's only one straight road through the landscape? Can someone explain that to me? But most of all there's the fact the movie is so uninspired. When you intend to make another slasher movie, please include something new or original. This was just another colorless hack and slash horror. But for lovers of gory movies, this surely is a must see.

 

My rating 3/10
Links : IMDB

The Benefactor (2015)

Summary :
A philanthropist meddles in the lives of newly-married couples in an attempt to relive his past.

Genre : Drama
Country : USA

Cast :
Richard Gere : Franny
Dakota Fanning : Olivia
Theo James : Luke

Director : Andrew Renzi

My opinion   

“Did you buy my house ?
I bought it for the three of you.
Welcome.”

I've never been a big fan of Richard Gere. I always associate him with ordinary films of the genre drama and comedy, with a lick of romance. Gere is also perfect for such films. A charismatic person with the right looks. Worthy son-in-law material and someone who made many women's hearts beat faster in those days. Since "Pretty Woman", a film with Gere was for me a film to avoid. Although I surely want to give "The Mothman Prophecies" a chance. And despite his old age, this 67 year-old former gigolo still looks surprisingly frivolous and attractive. Perhaps now you should look for his admirers among the over-60s.

I came across "The benefactor" by chance and it didn't look like a romantic comedy to me. Well, it's far from being comical. It shows the agony of the eccentric philanthropist Franny who's suffering from remorse and regret. A guilt this millionaire carries from the time that he's involved in a car accident along with a befriended couple Bobby (Dylan Baker) and Mia (Cheryl Hines). Whether he's the cause or not is not really clear. Daughter Olivia (Dakota Fanning), with whom the bachelor Franny has a good bond, turns his back on him.

 

Five years later, the charming, "dashing through life" multimillionaire who realized energetic plans, has changed into an introverted hermit who spends his days making morphine cocktails. A haggard loner with an appearance of Gandalf the White. A neglected Santa Claus with a thick beard and a wild hairdo. A caveman living in his luxurious cave. And then Olivia returns. Contacting him with the message that she'll be returning as a newly wed, pregnant woman. Franny gets his act together and from that moment on he only has one plan. And that plan is to make this couple's life as easy as possible and support them with his fortune.

To be honest, I think the acting performance of Richard Gere in this film was sublime. An overwhelming, charismatic character who demands all the attention during the whole movie. In such a fantastic way that the parts of Dakota Fanning and Theo James, the husband of Olivia, almost completely fade into the background. Gere shows a character that sways from one mood into another. From a flamboyant, enthusiastic founder of a children's hospital to a pitiful heap of misery. And then resurrecting again as a benefactor. Enthusiastically but with a tormented mind. At times I couldn't believe this was really Richard Gere. Fanning's character was reduced to a piece of scenery that served as the initiator of Franny's behavior. The same applies to Theo James. Although he also pleasantly surprised me.

 
The acting looks respectable. What about the story itself? Well, that's something else. First, it is terribly boring and dead simple. The whole story (not the psychological situation) can easily be summarized in a few concise sentences. In other words, nothing much happens. What story were they actually trying to tell? The tragedy of lost friends and a painful rehabilitation? A demonstration of excessive generosity and intrusiveness? The physical and mental deterioration because of an addiction? All of that was in it, but the character study dominated. Also certain questions remained unanswered. Was it really Franny's fault? Where did his fortune come from? And isn't it so that rich people can buy whatever they want? What I do know is that I'll give 'Time out of mind"a chance.

 

My rating 5/10
Links : IMDB

Absolutely Anything (2015)

Summary :
Neil Clarke, a teacher, suddenly discovers that he has magical powers. In fact, he can make anything happen with a flick of his hand. From vaporizing an annoying class (and bringing them back to life) to changing his best friend into a type of man every woman adores. The only problem is finding the right words and finding out what he really wants.

Genre : Comedy
Country : USA/UK

Cast :
Simon Pegg : Neil
Kate Beckinsale : Catherine
Robin Williams : Dennis the dog

Director : Terry Jones

My opinion  

Give me a really big dick!
[Falls over] Ouch! Not “THAT” big! Obviously! Return to your old size!
Let me have a dick that women find exciting!
Yeah, that’s better. Could I have it white?

What to expect from a comedy with lots of famous comedians ? They managed to persuade the full Monty Python crew to do the voices of aliens that form a kind of intergalactic council. The fact that Terry Jones sat in the producer's seat also helped, I guess. Simon Pegg plays the leading role as Neil. And you can hear the late Robin Williams in one of his latest achievements as the hyperkinetic dog Dennis. Joanna Lumley and Rob Riggle were assigned respectively the most restrictive and the most annoying part. And finally Kate "Stonehearst Asylum" Beckinsale plays the part of the beautiful neighbor who's adored by Neil. What the hell can go wrong with such cast?

In many ways this film can be compared with "Bruce Almighty". Although the latter was superior in all areas. Even though I've seen "Bruce Almighty" so many times, I can't resist watching it again everytime I come across it while surfing the television channels. I'm afraid I'd skip "Absolutely anything" when I do. Just like Bruce, Neil got God-like powers at some point. So whatever he wishes, he can make possible just with a simple hand movement. However, this time it's not God who took care of that, but some belligerent space creatures from another galaxy. They plucked the Voyager, with an instruction tablet on it how to reach us, out of space. Initially earth would be destroyed. Eventually, this destruction is deferred and the humans are given the chance to prove that they are a superior race. And yes, our good friend Neil is the chosen one.

"Absolutely anything" is the complete opposite of "The World's end" (another movie featuring Simon Pegg) in terms of development. "The World's End" first 15 minutes weren't particularly inviting. But as the film progressed, it became an amusing, hilarious film full of absurdities. "Absolutely anything" begins terribly funny with various comic and silly situations. But after a while the gimmick with the waving hand of Neil wasn't that funny anymore and from there on it all went downhill. Eventually it ends up as a trite, irritating and predictable slapstick. Even Robin Williams and the entire crew of Monty Python couldn't save it. Perhaps the hopping little turd at the beginning was a sign.

This may sound a bit too critical. It isn't all that bad. The extraterrestrial board has its funny moment (but don't expect Monty Python situations). The antics Neil has to undergo whenever he wishes something again, made me laugh regularly. The personal transformation, the classroom scene, the headmaster and the devotion to his colleague Ray, just to name a few. Strange though that Neil, as an English teacher, knows his grammar well when standing in front of the class, but when he's using his powers, the wisdom of the correct formulations is lost. Dennis the dog looks cute and cuddly and the improvisations of Robin Williams make it a personality. Hilarious sometimes. But it feels as if Williams worked within the lines of the script. Had they given him more improvisation space, it might have been funnier. And fortunately, the romantic theme wasn't developed extensively. All in all a relaxing and sometimes funny film. There are some lame jokes and an annoying American, but British humor and some absurd twists here and there, ease the pain. The most sad part of this film is the fact that it's the last film with Robin Williams starring in it.

 

My rating 5/10
Links : IMDB

Crimson Peak (2015)

Summary
Edith Cushing is running away from a family tragedy. She marries Thomas Sharpe, a mysterious stranger. She comes to live with him and his sister, Lady Lucille Sharpe. She starts to find out that the Sharpe's home is filled with ghosts.

Genre : Mystery/Drama/Horror
Country : USA/Canada

Cast :
Mia Wasikowska : Edith Cushing
Jessica Chastain : Lucille Sharpe
Tom Hiddleston : Thomas Sharpe

Director : Guillermo del Torro

My opinion  

“Ghosts are real. This I know.”

"Crimson Peak" is visually overwhelming and ingeniously devised. Although it was a bit of a disappointment for me, it made a crushing, lasting impression on me on the other hand. Not because of the story itself or the cautious use of special effects, but the overall atmosphere and detailed decoration of this gothic love drama. I assumed that this would be an excellent horror. And that because of the trailer. Normally I try to avoid trailers. But avoiding trailers in a theater is rather difficult. Eagerly I saw that it was about a house that comes to life. I was expecting a baroque-looking Amityville House. The house wasn't disappointing. A Victorian, ghostly ruin full of dark corridors, murky caverns and sinister secrets. The Adams family would be jealous. But apart from some ghostly apparitions it was no more than a obscure drama in which a romance and a diabolical fraud scenario occurred. 

Del Toro succeeded in surprising me with "Splice" and especially "Mama". After his intermezzo with "Pacific Rim", he returns to the darker and creepier genre. "Mama" was more frightening as a paranormal horror story than this movie. There are some great horror moments that will give you the chills. The scarce ghostly presences look pretty decent and occasionally it made me think of how the creature in "Mama" was moving around. But the darkness in this movie, is mainly achieved by the overall Gothic decorations. Both the sets and the costumes contributed to that. A house like a morgue. Deathlike, chilly with those blacks shades and rotting walls full of secrets, while standing on a blood-red surface.  

The characters of this Victorian era also look eerily deathlike. An appearance as if an undertaker took care of their makeup. Mia Wasikowska plays Edith Cushing, the fragile daughter of a wealthy entrepreneur who wants to become a writer. Her literary work deals with ghosts. Since her childhood, she has the ability to see ghosts. Her mother, who died of cholera, visited her when she was only 10 years old and warned her for a place called "Crimson Peak". This particular moment is subtly visualized. A chilling moment that contrasts with the other appearances. And then she meets the likeable, sophisticated English landowner Thomas Sharpe (Tom Hiddleston) when he knocks at her father's door with the demand to help financing a modern clay machine. What follows is the predictable romantic development, a sudden tragedy and Edith deliberately seeking solace in the arms of Thomas. And before she knows it she's on her way to England to move into "Allerdale Hall," the family patrimony which is sinking into the red clay, along with her husband Thomas and his sinister sister Lucille (Jessica Chastain).

"Crimson Peak" has its pros and cons. First there's the atmospheric cinematography. There's a huge Edgar Allan Poe feeling about it. Furthermore there are the beautiful costumes and the detailed decorations. And finally the solid acting and performances. Hiddleston, who reminded me of Coppola's Dracula at a certain moment, and Wasikowska act impressively. But Chastain rises above everyone as the crazy sister. The whole resembles a ride in a haunted house at the fair. Through the pitch-black darkness interspersed with deep colors, where you expect heart crippling shock effects anytime. And just like this haunted house at the fancy fair, the conclusion afterwards is that it wasn't so bad as expected. It wasn't boring, but it wasn't very scary either. The biggest mistake they made was having people believe "Crimson Peak" is a sort of horror. Ultimately, it's just a sentimental costume drama with a paranormal aspect. But believe me, it's masterfully portrayed!

My rating 6/10
Links : IMDB