Transformers: Age of Extinction (2014)

 

Year: 2014

Running Time: 165 minutes

Director: Michael Bay

Writers: Ehren Kruger

Cast: Mark Wahlberg, Nicola Peltz, Stanley Tucci, Kelsey Grammer, Jack Reynor, Sophia Myles

 

The Transformers franchise is turning into the franchise that just keeps on giving. That doesn't mean that what it gives is particularly good, but there seems to be no stopping these films. Even when the last film wasn't particularly a masterpiece, that's still doesn't stop people getting excited about the next film and this trend appears to be continuing with Michael Bay's fourth Transformers film. Transformers: Age of Extinction is the victim of a disastrous screenplay which proves that sometimes we really don't learn from our past as it makes the same mistakes as the third film. While some of the sound editing and special effects are well done, it is gift-wrapped in the ridiculousness of the situation that it is impossible to take even the action sequences seriously, which is what Transformers is all about.

 

It has been three years since the battle of Chicago and the Autobots have all gone into hiding after the government has ruled that all Transformers are now considered a threat. A struggling Texan inventor, Cade Yeager (Mark Wahlberg) is the one who finds the incognito and injured Optimus Prime (voiced by Peter Cullen) and restores him to health. There is a huge bounty on his head which would help Cade and his teenage daughter, Tessa (Nicola Peltz) out immensely and even though Cade is hesitant about giving away the whereabouts of the head Autobot, they are soon found out and it becomes not just the Autobots who are running for their lives.

 

Sequels are often talked about as being films which take the things that worked in the first film and exaggerating them in hope of continuing that success. So what happens when you get to the fourth film? You would think that if a franchise has got to a fourth film the screenwriters would have worked out what works and what doesn't, but if Transformers: Age of Extinction is anything to go by, this is quite clearly not always the case. The screenplay is absolutely atrocious and it's dialogue particularly dreadful. It is usually acceptable for the dialogue in an action film to be a little bit corny, but this film takes it to a whole new level. It is the type of dialogue you would expect to hear in a B grade movie. Many of the words that come out of the character's mouths are just laughable and the result of screenwriter, Ehren Kruger trying to do too many things at once. There is no way which the actors could have delivered some of these lines and not have them sound ridiculous. For example, a line like "My face is my warrant" makes very little sense and Mark Wahlberg's Cane exclaiming "I'm an inventor!" prompts you to wonder "Who really calls themselves an inventor in this age?"

 

Time is something which Transformers: Age of Extinction has little grasp of on various levels.   Firstly at two hours and 45 minutes, it is needlessly long. Much like the third film, Transformers: Dark of the Moon, there comes a point in the film which feels like a finale and if it had finished here, it would have been almost bearable. However, it drags on for another hour while the audience still remains ready for it to finish. From a production side, the film is terrible at representing time and distance. The Yeager family begin in Texas, then travel by truck/Optimus Prime to Monument Valley on the Utah/Arizona border and then in no time they are in Chicago. This whole trip would take them at least 35 hours if they drove non-stop, but seems like it happens in the blink of an eye in the film. The drive from Monument Valley to Chicago itself takes 22.5 hours at least, but this isn't represented at all.

 

However, Transformers films have always been more about the action and special effects than the brilliant story and witty dialogue. As one could expect, the CGI used to create the Transformers is quite impressive, but there are also some scenes in which the CGI looks removed from it's live action surroundings in a way which it shouldn't. Another failing occurs when the situation is so ridiculous that the special effects seem comical. The slow motion screaming in the car is more funny rather than thrilling. With such wonderful special effects and also impressive sound editing on hand, it feels as if they are wasted by trying to support and save the screenplay.

 

Again, with a screenplay such as this there is little hope for any good performances, not that one would be expecting any Academy Award performances in a Transformers film. While Mark Wahlberg's performance is lacking emotion (especially when his daughter has a gun to her head), he is a more convincing Transformers lead man than Shia LaBeouf. While the two characters are quite different, physically and characteristically Wahlberg gives the impression that he belongs in the film more than LaBeouf. Stanley Tucci's Joshua Joyce has one too many comical lines and starts to waver on the brink of becoming annoying.

 

Michael Bay loves his Transformers leading ladies. First there was Megan Fox, then Rosie Huntington-Whitely and now there's Nicola Peltz. Tessa is quite a weak character and is regrettably so as she has the potential to be a strong character. Towards the beginning of the film, she points out to her father all the things she helps him with and how he couldn't get by without her, which would normally indicate that this is a strong and independent woman to be able to take on the role as woman of the house. Yet, she rarely puts up a fight during the film and is more than often the damsel in distress. This is no fault of Peltz as this is what the screenplay calls for, but with a character like this there is really no way to be able to acknowledge what type of actress Peltz actually is. There is very little chemistry between her and on screen boyfriend, Shane played by Jack Reynor, or between her and Wahlberg. Also, what girl wears incredibly high wedges to school and to walk along a long dirt road when she comes home? A Michael Bay Transformers girl, that's who.

 

The incredibly funny thing is that when the fifth Transformers film will be released, nothing that has been said about Transformers: Age of Extinction will matter. The pull of the Transformers franchise is too strong to allow the previous film's success to detract from the excitement of future films. All we can hope is that Ehren Kruger will learn from the mistakes of this film and make up for it in the next film.

 

3/10

 

The Fighter

Year: 2010
Director: David O. Russell
Cast: Mark Wahlberg, Christian Bale, Melissa Leo, Amy Adams

In My Own Words
I know, I know, but better late than never! I wanted to see "The Fighter" as soon as it was released. It just made it a tad difficult that it was released when I was overseas in a country where it hadn't been released yet, and was going to be released after Ieft. It would have made a lot more sense if I had reviewed this film before the Oscars...but better late than never! It's always hard trying to judge whether someone will win an Oscar for their acting talents in a particluar film when you haven't seen the film. However, these days you can pretty much telll whether they are going to win or not based on how many awards they win before the Oscars. Now, having finally seen "The Fighters", I can say that Christian Bale and Melissa Leo are deserved of their Oscars. Leo has redeemed herself slightly in my eyes now that I have since the film she won the award for, as I was really not impressed with her dropping the "F bomb" onstage upon recieving her award. There are some places that that word is just not appropriate for, and the most prestigious film event of the year is one of those places. She does have...interesting fashion sense as well as she showed at the Independent Spirit Awards. But she was given the Oscar based on her performance in "The Fighter" so let's just focus on that.

On that subject, the Best Supporting Actress category at the Oscars this year was probably the most competitive I have seen in years and any one of the five actresses nominated could have walked home with it.  Amy Adams was brilliant in this film, just as Melissa Leo was. Adams is another star who has come so close scooping up an Oscar and still hasn't taken the gold man home. This was her third nomination in the Best Supporting Actress category, with her first two being for her roles in "Junebug" and "Doubt". Adams is one of those rare actresses who is completely versatile. She can do the sugar and spice roles and make everyone fall in love, and she can also do the dramatic roles which will, more often than not, land her an Oscar nomination. I have no doubt she will eventually scoop one up. You never know what her playing Janis Joplin in the upcoming film "Janis Joplin: Get It While You Can" will do for her!

On another note, we all know what is going on in Japan at the moment with the earthquake and the tsunami. It is completely heartbreaking and terrifying to watch. There have been several world events in the past few months like this such as the floods in Queensland in Australia and the eartquake in Christchurch, New Zealand, which are horrifying to watch and can make you feel pretty horrible. In times like this when watching the news gets us down, we can be thankful for film. Film provides you an escape from reality, if only for an hour or two. They're not going to fix the world, but they can take you away from the terror for a few hours and depending on the film, can help you to remember that there is so much beauty in this world and many things we can be thankful for. Say a prayer for those in Japan, we're thinking of you.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review

David O. Russell's masterpiece, "The Fighter" is one of the best sports films to come out in years. Whether boxing is your thing or not, this film completely captures you from beginning to end. "The Fighter" isn't so much about boxing than it is about the character in it and the relationships they form. It is a perfect character cased film, and how many awards and nominations it had for the stars during awards season is perfect proof of this. The film is based on the true story of boxer, Micky Ward (Mark Wahlberg) and his brother and trainer, Dicky Eklund (Christian Bale). Dicky, once a boxer himself, has plummeted into cocaine addiction and eventually lands himself in prison. "The Fighter" looks at the relationship between the brothers and the whole Ward family and the lingering question is, does Micky stand a better chance of taking the world welterweight championship with out or without Dicky and his family's influence?

The best part about this film is indeed the acting. Mark Wahlberg gives a splendid performance as Micky Ward. However, it does feel as though he is constantly overshadowed by his supporting actors. Wahlberg's Micky is perhaps the easiest role to play in the movie. He does it well, but it isn't too much of a change from Wahlberg's other roles and he isn't taking any great risks in his role. However, Wahlberg is one of the producers of "The Fighter" so credit must be given to him in his achievement of the film overall. Christian Bale gives a career best performance as Dicky, the older brother with the addictive and slight offbeat personality. Bale completely becomes his character in every way and you completely forget that you are watching Christian Bale and truly believe that you are seeing the real Dicky Eklund on the screen. He is definately deserving of his Oscar and every other award he has taken home for this role. Melissa Leo also gives a superb performance as Alice Ward, Micky and Dicky's obsessive mother. Like Bale, she completley transforms herself into the character, both in mannerisms and in appearence. She isn't a likable character, but great to watch and captivating in every scene she is in. One tends to back Mickey's girlfriend, Charlene Fleming, played by Amy Adams over Alice. Adams plays smart mouthed Charlene perfectly. Although she can be quite crass at times, she is generally likable and the audience identifies with her as the one who stands by her man through thick and thin. She captures just the right amount of emotion for every scenario in every scene and is completely relatable.

The acting isn't the only thing about this film that is brilliant about this film. The construction of these characters and the way they are portrayed on screen is the result of a great achievement in direction by David O. Russell. He knows the ins and outs of all of the characters and passes on all his knowledge to his actors. The film is tightly knit and absolutely captivating from beginning to end. The script is very well written and every scene is meaningful. The cinematography is also brilliant. One of the great moments of cinematography is the way which Russell focuses in on Micky's fighting hand and the way which his hand shows the way he feels about each of the charcaters he forms a relationship with. Unlike the majority of other sports related films, this film isn't as feel good as the others. Yet it does make you feel good. It is another one of those amazing films which make you happy just by watching it and witnessing something fantastic.

"The Fighter" is a masterpiece by David O. Russell. He has brought to the big screen a story of tragedy and triumph with colourful characters and beautiful film making. This film will always be remembered for the amazing performances by the amazing actors who took part and shined.
9/10

The Other Guys

The Other Guys
Year: 2010
Director: Adam McKay
Cast: Will Ferrell, Mark Wahlberg, Eva Mendes, Michael Keaton

In My Own Words
I love a movie which gets mixed reviews. I’m not referring to the movie reviews you see on TV or read in magazines, but the reviews from the people who really matter in your life. The one’s who’s opinions you really care about like your family and your friends. The majority of people will listen more to the ones close to them regarding whether they should see a film rather than the media. So it intrigued me to no end when one half of the people I know tell me to see a movie and the other half tell me to wait until the DVD. When a situation like this arises, damn it I am going to see the movie at the cinema! If someone normally hears that a movie is bad from a friend, they normally won’t see it, even if someone else they know says that it is good. Me on the other hand, my mind works another way when it comes to movies. If people are conflicted on whether it is good or not, then I’m sure there is going to be plenty to talk about after I see the film! Nothing like a good debate about film! Who needs parliamentary question time when we can all sit around and talk about movies? Maybe if Australia had got Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott to discuss their favourite movies before the election, it would have been over and done with a lot quicker.

Maybe the difference in opinion for many people in this film comes from whether they are Will Ferrell fans or not. I don’t believe Mr Ferrell’s humour is quite for everyone. He does definitely have a cult following though. However, like everything, there is always one film which will break through the haters expectations and a wider audience will enjoy it. I don’t think this is one of those films though.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
“The Other Guys” is funny. There is no denying that, but oh does it try hard to be. Subtlety is definitely not the order of the day in this film and although it is not a fantastic film, it is not a complete dud either. Allen Gamble (Will Ferrell) and Terry Hoitz (Mark Wahlberg) are two cops who are not the heroes and do not have any hope of being so. They are always in the background watching everyone else take all the credit and are the laughing stock of their beat. Not only that, but they intensely dislike each other. Even when they do happen to tap into something that doesn’t seem quite right, no one seems to take any notice of them. Gamble and Hoitz find that by working together and remaining outcasts, they are actually able to accomplish more than what they and anybody else would’ve thought.

“The Other Guys” tries very hard to be funny. This is more so at the beginning of the film where the jokes just seem predictable, old and forced. It is as though director and writer Adam McKay was almost worried that people wouldn’t find the movie funny, so he had to try and cram as many things that the audience may find funny in so that he couldn’t lose. However, this lack of subtle humour seems to calm down towards the middle of the film and there are actually some very funny parts. The film is not deep by any means and one cannot take it seriously, mainly because of the presence of Will Ferrell. Not to say that Ferrell cannot do a serious film or carry on a serious role, because he did so in “Stranger Than Fiction”, but in a film which is first and foremost a comedy and has him in it, there is no hope for a tearful moment. There is definitely good character development though. Each main character has a back story and an entertaining one at that which does make the film more enjoyable to watch. The special effects and action sequences are very impressive, but unfortunately there isn’t nearly enough of them throughout the film.

Will Ferrell is much like he is in the majority of his other films. He is very funny in parts of the film, but he doesn’t give anything in “The Other Guys” that sets his role as Allen Gamble apart from his others. Gamble is a very entertaining character and it is obvious that no one else could have played this role besides Ferrell. He does play it perfectly to his ability, but it won’t be one of the characters he will always be remembered for. Mark Wahlberg gives an easy performance in his role as Terry Hoitz. It is a different role compared to what he has done in the last few years and it is interesting to see him in a comedy role. He is not the funniest person in the film, but doesn’t do a bad job by all means. Eva Mendes plays Gamble’s wife, Sheila and although Mendes isn’t known for her comedy roles, is really quite funny. However, it is almost painful to see Michael Keaton in a role such as this.

“The Other Guys” could almost be described as a try hard comedy in its first half, but redeems itself in its latter half. It’s interesting and colourful characters also help to save this film from being completely terrible. It could be so much better than what it is, but those who love Will Ferrell movies will love it.
5/10

Date Night

Date Night
Year: 2010
Director: Shawn Levy
Cast: Steve Carrell, Tina Fey, Mark Wahlberg, Taraji P. Henson

In My Own Words
Finally, a comedy this year that is actually funny. It is rare to find a good comedy these days. So many writers write screenplays thinking that something sounds funny on page, when it is actually completely unoriginal and not even worthy to generate a giggle on screen. “Date Night” is completely different. It is funny in a pure way without throwing in crude or over the top jokes. So many comedy films dwell on gutter humour and it just gets old. But not this one. In my opinion, Tina Fey and Steve Carell are two of the best comedy actors around at the moment, both being “Saturday Night Live” graduates. They are both extremely funny and both brilliant in the way they can think quickly on their feet. All you need to do is watch the outtakes during the credits at the end of the film to realise how quick witted and hilarious they both are. I am a big Tina Fey fan and if there is one woman I want to be like, it is her. However, as much as I would love to meet her, I would feel like a total dunce compared to her.

Isn’t it funny with people who were in “Saturday Night Live”, when they are in a movie, there are cameos galore. Keep an eye out on in this film for all the stars who are not listed in the opening credits. When these cameos occur in the film, you will hear all the other audience members exclaim and speak excitedly to their neighbours, as I did. “Saturday Night Live” comedians are known as the most elite comedians in the states and I can understand the star power they have.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
“Date Night” is the funniest movie of 2010 thus far. It is clean, classic humour, but do not think that means it’s dull. The film is far from that. There are still some moments which are just silly, but it’s not possible to have a whole movie where every single joke is funny. A good comedy is one which different types of people can enjoy and one which has you laughing at the beginning and at the end. Nobody likes a comedy that gets old after 40 minutes. Phil (Steve Carell) and Claire Foster (Tina Fey) are a self-confessed boring couple from New Jersey. They feel like their life is getting too predictable and that there’s not enough excitement , so rather than go to their normal diner haunt for their date night, they decide to doll up and go to one of New York City’s best restaurant. When they cannot get a table, they pose as the Tripplehorn’s, who have a reservation, but do not show up when summoned. This turns the night into the most unusual and thrilling date night they have ever and will ever experience.

As expected, this is not an emotional journey film, but simply just a lot of fun. The film is not boring or monotonous for a minute. It is predictable in a way as you can easily guess what is going to happen, but you do not know how it is going to happen. There is so many funny one liners that will have people quoting for days after they see the film. It is a very well written and witty script which is well directed by Shawn Levy. The only criticism of the script is that some features of the film are unnecessary, but there isn’t very many of these. The only one that comes to mind is the inclusion of Leighton Meester’s baby-sitter character. The jokes cracked here are very lame and it is clear that the only reason she is there is because she is from “Gossip Girl”. There are also some moments which don’t add up in the grand scheme of things either. Yet, these moments thankfully do not make up the film. The majority of it is just creatively fun and laugh out loud funny.

As for the acting, not Oscar-worthy, but both Steve Carell and Tina Fey are hilarious. “Date Night” is a must see for fans of either of these two. The two have great on screen chemistry and work so well together. They just seem to compliment and work off each other. It is definitely Steve Carell’s funniest big screen role since “Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy”. Fans of “30 Rock” will love the comedy in the film and will see Liz Lemon in many of Fey’s scenes. Taraji P. Henson is great as the tough Detective Arroyo and Kristen Wigg is hilarious as the Foster’s friend, Haley Sullivan. There is also cameo’s galore throughout the film which only add to the fun.

“Date Night” is a film which people of all ages will enjoy. More an adult comedy than one for the teenagers, but no doubt they will enjoy it too. The film will make married couples realise how just one night out of the ordinary can make the world of difference. A great comedy film that will be one of the comedies 2010 is remembered for.
7/10

The Lovely Bones

The Lovely Bones
Year: 2009
Director: Peter Jackson
Cast: Saoirse Ronan, Rachel Weisz, Mark Wahlberg, Stanley Tucci, Susan Surandon

In My Own Words
I really didn’t want to write this review. Not because I have lost motivation at all, or even that I am not in the mood. I didn’t want to write this review because I always hate writing bad things about a movie I have really been looking forward to. However, this is all part of being a film critic and it has to be done.

I read the book “The Lovely Bones” by Alice Sebold about 2 months ago and I absolutely loved it. It was one of the most beautiful books I had read in so long. I had been looking forward to the movie before it, but after I read the book, it was leading the way as the Boxing Day release that I most wanted to see. Obviously it took me a bit longer to actually get around to seeing it though. I thought that the book was so wonderful that nobody, especially Peter Jackson, could make it into a bad movie. It was a silly thought to have, as 40 minutes into the film I was thinking “This book should have never been made into a movie”. The book is just far too complex with too much emotion in its words to be transferred onto the screen in a two hour movie. In saying this, there are certain aspects that could and should have been done better. Maybe Peter Jackson should stick to the adventure genre that he has established himself in.

It’s such a dull feeling seeing a film that you expected so much out of when it turns out to be far less than your expectations. I normally try not to expect too much from movies so I won’t be disappointed if it is a flop, but this one I felt so strongly about considering it is such an amazing novel. My advice, read the book if you think the film sounds interesting. You’ll feel more satisfied after that than the film. Harsh, but true.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
“The Lovely Bones” is the return to the drama film for award-winning director Peter Jackson. Box office wise it is a triumphant return, but critically wise, not at all. This film could have been spectacular, but it falls in a mess not even half way through. “The Lovely Bones”, based on the best seller written by Alice Sebold, is about a young girl by the name of Susie Salmon (Saoirse Ronan) who is murdered by a man in her hometown and travels to her own heaven. From there she watches all the people on Earth that she has left behind and who are affected by her death.

One would think that “The Lovely Bones” would be an extremely moving movie that so much could be done with. Peter Jackson turns it into just that, a movie that so much COULD have been done with. This is probably the wrong way to say it, Jackson does do so much with the movie, but it isn’t the right mixture to make the film into a masterpiece. Fans of the book will be severely disappointed in this film and people who have not read the book will be confused and disappointed. Jackson overdoes certain aspects of the film and neglects others. It is no doubt that there are some dazzling images and the cinematography is amazing throughout the film, but a film with a subject matter such as this cannot rely on stunning images to pull it through. If the film was primarily about the afterlife, this may have been acceptable, but throwing what is happening where Susie was left behind makes it an uneven balance. There is not enough of the emotions which her family go through to make it a particularly emotional film or to feel any connection to these characters at all. People who have not read the book and watch the film, will be confused with some parts and wonder why some things are happening, particularly at the end. Jackson leaves much of the book out and some parts which he does include, do not make sense without the parts he leaves out. In Jackson’s defence, he would have to make the film far longer than what it actually was to truly capture the essence of the emotion which is supposed to be felt as well as the beauty of heaven.

The acting in the film is not half bad, although there is not enough of it. Ronan is the star of the film and does do a good job. She exhibits the characteristics of a young, innocent teenage girl and goes through the emotions to come to the understanding of her death. Rachel Weisz and Mark Wahlberg as Susie’s parents, are good in parts, but far more could have been done with their characters. Although they do well with what is given to them, there is no chemistry between them on the screen, but this can be attributed to no in depth character and relationship development throughout the film. Stanley Tucci, as Susie’s murderer, is the stand out of the film. His character is the only one with is well developed and creates a bond with the audience. He oozes the air of that unusual neighbour that nobody knows much about, but everybody knows there is something not quite right about him. In all, the acting is not bad by any of the characters, bit is just badly directed.

It is such a shame to see Peter Jackson’s direction take a downturn after the success of “The Lord Of the Rings” and his remake of “King Kong”. It would seem that he tried to take the winning aspects from his prior successes and bring them into “The Lovely Bones”, a film that does not rely on special effects to make it memorable. “The Lovely Bones” is first and foremost, a disappointment.

3/10