I'm just a guy who loves stories, whether they be past, present, future, movies, TV Shows, video games, whatever. If you came to get an average guys thoughts on film, you've come to the right place.
Honestly, when I first saw the trailers for Night at the Museum back in 2006, I didn't think much of them. I was getting into my teens at the time and I was just starting to get into this magical thing called PG-13 movies. Why would I go back to a movie like Night at The Museum when that movie is meant for kids?
Since then I really hadn't thought too much of it, I haven't been a huge Ben Stiller fan in almost anything he did, I just wasn't at all interested.
Unfortunately, my interest came when Robin Williams passed away. Suddenly, every movie he's ever been in seemed timeless and cherished. It also was about the same time that the third movie came out and I finally got around to thinking that maybe there's something to this franchise. I mean its been going for a while now, it wasn't until right now that I realized this movie is almost a decade old. Its probably about time I took a look and saw what the fuss was all this time.
Night at The Museum follows the story of Larry Daley (played by Ben Stiller). Larry is... well I'm not totally sure what Larry is. I think he's an inventor, he just kind of seems like he's tried to be great at something but has always failed. He is divorced and has a son that has taken a liking to his step father (played by Paul Rudd), and all Larry wants to do is get his sons approval.
After facing eviction, Larry finally settles and gets a job as a night guard at the American Museum of National History in New York City.
There he's introduced to the old night watch made up of a really fun group of actors. There's Cecil (played by Dick Van Dyke) and his two guard buddies, played by Mikey Rooney and Bill Cobbs.
They give him a vague, mysterious job description and put him on the job right away.
Much to Larry's dismay, the things in the museum, from the dinosaur bones, to the wax cavemen, to the figurines showing the roman empire come alive and run amuck in the museum.
I know, I know, this picture is not from the first movie
Now when I first saw it, half the reason I wasn't very impressed was because the plot seemed very predictable. Larry is going to be in wonder of what's going on and have trouble comprehending it, this will be a conflict eventually bringing him to accept his situation and actually make this a great situation.
Its a pretty predictable movie, but again, its a movie made for younger kids, what do you expect?
The surprise I had in this film was how much I grew to actually like the characters. I thought that they gave it all away in the trailers. There's Teddy Roosevelt, there's cavemen, there's a moving dinosaur skeleton. etc. Honestly, there's not a huge surprise if you've seen a lot of the trailers.
However, the characters are actually kind of funny and surprisingly fun to go on this adventure with. If you're going into this movie thinking its going to be hilarious, you're very wrong. Its entertaining for sure, but there's only a couple moments where I chuckled. I mean its a funny situation but I think this is more of an adventure film rather than a comedy film. So while I thought I was going to laugh more at this movie, the whimsicalness of the entire thing kind of made up for how unfunny I actually find Ben Stiller.
If you've never seen this film, I'm not going to say you're missing out incredibly. Its a fun time, especially if you're watching with little kids, which I was doing tonight.
The performances are pretty good for a family adventure film and you can tell that Stiller and Williams are having fun with it, I mean why else would they do two other sequels after this one?
There is something pretty creative and charming about the film. I mean its based off a children's book, one that I had never heard of but perhaps thats the creative part about it. I assume its a good adaptation and fun way to give kids the desire to want and go educate themselves in museums. And I think that was the underlying theme of the film. The movie really makes museums out to be really interesting, even without the sets coming to life and its good to get some kind of push for museums, which I think they're trying to say are dying forms of education for kids.
Am I going to go out of my way to see the sequels of this film? Maybe if I'm really interested in seeing one of Robin William's last films, but honestly I'm glad that I finally saw Night at the Museum and I know what all the hype is about. Is it a ground breaking film? No. But it does have a certain charm to it and it was an enjoyable ride.
But what do you think? Have you seen Night at the Museum? What did you think? Comment and Discuss below! Also shoot me a message or follow me on Twitter @cmhaugen24. There you can get updates on my blog and get your fix on movie news and reviews.
I'll leave you with this. I found this guy pretty recently and he does a really fun and pretty darn good impression of Robin Williams. In this video he just compiles all the performances of Robin Williams together in a tribute to the great actor. Enjoy!
I saw a preview for Bloodline when I went to a movie. I really had no idea what it might be about, all I saw was Kyle Chandler, and I got a similar feeling to the show the way I did when I saw True Detective.
If you read my review of Out of the Furnace, you know how pumped I am for the second season of True Detective and I'm almost considering re-watching that entire season just because I'm having some withdrawals of that show. Maybe its the fact that its a crime thriller-drama set in the south, maybe its Kyle Chandler but there was something in the trailer for this show that I was very interested in.
I mean take a look at the trailer, tell me it doesn't sound at least a little bit interesting.
So Bloodline is the story of a family in the Florida Keys that owns a glamorous hotel. Its a luxurious bed and breakfast sort of place, perfect for honeymoons and vacationing. This inn is mainly run by Robert Rayburn (played by Sam Shepard) and Sally Rayburn (played by Sissy Spacek). These two have four kids. Three of them have stayed in the keys and made their lives around the family business.
First you have John Rayburn (played by Kyle Chandler), a detective with the county police department in the area. He's the second oldest of the family. Then you have Meg Rayburn (played by Linda Cardellini), the third in the family. She is also the family lawyer and proprietor of the family will. Then there's Kevin (played by Norbert Leo Butz) the youngest son. Kevin is a local fisherman and has a bit of a temper.
And then there is the oldest son of the Rayburns, Danny (played by Ben Mendelsohn). The black sheep of the family. Danny has not been home for years. The circumstances of his exile are left pretty vague in the beginning and are developed as the show goes on.
The first thing right off the bat that I didn't really expect from this show was such an accurate representation of family and the interactions that go along between the members of a family.
The Rayburns are not your typical sitcom family, they have problems that seem very reasonable and they know each other very well and I got that feeling from the very beginning from all the siblings. Everyone has the family in mind and everyone wants to do right by the family but everyone has their own way of doing that.
For example, John is the responsible one in the family. Though he's not the oldest, he is the one the family goes to when they need a leader. Being as he is a cop, this makes sense and I can believe this dynamic within the family. Meg is the only female in the family. While she is not the youngest, she probably is closet to the parents in her work as their lawyer and is the closest tied to the business. She sets her self up as the mediator, the person who only wants peace and isn't ready for a confrontation. Again, I can believe this. And Kevin is immediately set up as the hot head. While he is the most confrontational, you can tell he has the family put first. He may have a alternative way of doing things but he is hot headed so I believe that.
And then Danny comes in as the black sheep, the one who nobody ever feels belonged and the dynamic is perfect. All of these characters are situations I have felt in my family with 3 other siblings and while they're a little too stereotypical at some points, they are relatable and thus are interesting.
And then you have the parents who are suppose to have formed their 4 children and I really like how they set these two up. At certain points you want to totally blame them for the way these people treat one another but at the same time its just a family dynamic and these two are trying as hard as they can and are put into different circumstances that are difficult.
Now, you may be thinking, this doesn't sound like much of a substitute for True Detective. Where is all the crime? Where is all the intrigue and violence? Well, you're half right. This show is not really a crime drama. At least not right away. Which brings me to the main problem I have with this show. This show is slow as molasses. Its so focused on this family dynamic, and this family getting used to their black sheep brother returning home and whether or not he will be able to stay or not.
Now where the intrigue and where the drama really comes from is the flash forwards this show has. The tagline for this show is, "We're not bad people, we just did a bad thing".
And what they do is a bad thing.
The return of Danny into this family really does bring a lot of problems and its not just the friction that comes with the family dynamic. Danny is a little bit more of a complicated character than he immediately lets off to be.
I have to applaud Ben Mendelsohn in his performance because prior to this I had never heard of the guy. Suddenly I'm hearing of all these other movies he is in and I'm interested in seeing more of him. But in this character, he rides this fine line of being a character you really pity, and a character you just down right hate. He's manipulative. He's cunning. He's also very charismatic and ends up just playing games with his siblings that drive them to their limits.
And while all the characters have their interests in the family business and they're looking out for their parents, they have their own story lines that interconnect and throughout it all, its almost as if Danny is conniving for everything to fit into his plan masterfully.
Danny is not your mustache twirling antagonist though. He's very much a person who has had a difficult life and in the end thinks he is the victim or the good guy in all of this. And that my friends is the sign of a great villain. I don't want to say he's the absolute villain of the show, but he's complicated.
Netflix is doing a very good job at creating these fascinating characters. From Frank Underwood in House of Cards, to Wilson Fisk in Dare Devil, and now to Danny in Bloodline.
Unfortunately, the show suffers from a horrible flaw that I have already brought up. Its slow as all hell.
I don't know if they're going for a feeling of the Florida Keys or if that was on purpose, but my lord, this show was so very difficult to stay awake through because the first few episodes are boring... drop dead boring!
Granted, the show does pick near the end and does get really good. And part of me can't really knock the show for being so boring in the beginning because its just setting up the background for the climax which is really great. Its just something that I can't totally recommend the show because it was really just a slow as hell beginning.
While the end of the show is fantastic, you have to wonder if its really worth the slow as hell beginning. The performances are really well done, especially in Ben Mendelsohn and Kyle Chandler.
Overall, Bloodline takes a while to get going. I can't promise the ending will be totally worth the slow beginning, but if you are used to watching slow dramas about families, you might like Bloodline.
Those are my thoughts on Bloodline. What do you think? Comment and Discuss below! Also follow me on Twitter @cmhaugen24 in order to get updates on movie news and reviews.
I'll leave you with this. Here's a random kind of fun video about people coming together and singing. Enjoy!
Here's the problem with my review of this movie right off the bat. I read this book in middle school. I loved this book in middle school! I have not read this book since middle school. Its to the point where I know the general idea of the story, I know the twists and turns that makes this story just so good. The things that I don't remember are the intricacies and paths taken to get from the beginning of this story, to the end.
Is this going to be an incredibly fair review. I don't think so. I'm going to try and stay away from comparing this movie to the book because A) Not everyone has read this book so they might not know what I'm talking about and B) Its been so long since I've read the book that even i you have read the book, I can't give a fair review of this movie as an adaptation of that book. I just feel like I remember enough about the book that I'm not able to give a fair review of the movie.
But let's start at the basics.
Andrew "Ender" Wiggin (played by Asa Butterfield) is growing up in future times, and is a cadet in the space military. He's being watched by higher ups, Colonel Hyrum Graff (played by Harrison Ford) and Major Gwen Anderson (played by Viola Davis).
These two are looking for a leader, somebody who can lead Earth's army and defend the planet form an alien species that attacked years ago.
See the story takes place in a world where aliens tried to invade us and we drove them back. Since then, the human race has been terrified of this alien race and will stop at nothing to defend themselves. This has gone so far as to recruit children to be the soldiers and leaders of the military. This was something I never really understood about this story and its kind of something you have to suspend your disbelief in order to get the story. Apparently children understand war differently and that's what they need, a different strategy because their old ones aren't working.
Ender is the third in his family to try this program. His brother was too ruthless, his sister was too compassionate, Ender seems to be the perfect balance of the two and Graff realizes that.
He's sent to space cadet boot camp and challenges are put up against him by the cadre of the camp to test his resolve and his abilities. He's put in the basic team and then quickly moved up to a group where the leader is a Napoleon complex asshole. Then he's moved up until he commands his own team. All the while they're playing this cool anti-gravity space war game.
Its all in the hopes that Ender is the leader that humanity needs to defeat these aliens.
The majority of the movie is the tests and trials Ender has to go through. As he climbs up the ranks and eventually does become the commander of the human fleet.
As far as performances go, the cast is pretty good. I think I wanted to see a movie of Ender's Game, again, in middle school. I don't know who I imagined playing all the characters but watching it now and having that separated but not totally severed view of the story, I think the casting was really good.
The obvious draw of the movie is Harrison Ford. To me, Harrison Ford can do no wrong. The guy is just a talented actor and he's just fun to watch on screen regardless.
But this he is actually bringing it. You can tell that Harrison Ford is not phoning (or as I like to call, Kingdom of the Crystal Skulling it) this one in and the character dynamic between him and Ender is really good. There's this father-son dynamic but at the same time, there's this removed feeling, taking any possibility of that kind of relationship away. Graff knows Ender is meant to do great things, he wants him to be great, but he doesn't want to be a distraction. Ford reminds me of actual Colonels that I have met int he military. They're tough leaders but they know potential when they see it.
Viola Davis's part is pretty good in the film. She kind of leaves half way through the film pretty abruptly. I guess at that point they didn't really need her, but she just kind of leaves.
Then there's Ben Kingsley. I can't really reveal who his character is in the film as it is a surprise. But I wasn't totally sure what he was doing in the film. I don't really remember his character in the book that well but his actions don't really match up with his experiences. In the end, he kind of feels like he just got shoehorned into the film. It didn't really feel like he needed to be in the film except for kind of tying loose ends and staying true to the book.
Again, I don't remember the character that well from the book so he could be staying very true to the character, but I wasn't that wild about Ben Kingsley in this film. Again, it felt like he was kind of shoe horned in.
But its interesting because this is the second film that I've seen Asa Butterfield in and it also had Ben Kingsley in it, same as Hugo.
Now, Asa Butterfield didn't really impress me in Hugo. I don't think he was bad, I just didn't come out of Hugo saying, the movie was mediocre but that Asa Butterfield, damn!
In Hugo, I think Butterfield was more of a vehicle and he didn't really need to carry the film. This movie is a little bit different. He still has the star power of Harrison Ford, Viola Davis, and Ben Kingsley to help, but for the most part, Butterfield has to carry this film and lead it.
And for the most part, he did.
Its difficult because Ender is a character who is incredibly smart. Its difficult to play a boy genius without acting like a robot. And for the most part, Butterfield does it pretty well.
Bottom line, the guy can act. I think he did a good job for this film. Is he a really good actor? I can't say that for sure. Only time will tell I suppose, I need to see him in more.
The main reason I'm so hesitant on this guy is because there was a rumor yesterday that he's our new Spider-man. I haven't decided on whether or not I'm going to do a post on that specifically right now or wait a couple days to see if Disney and Sony announce something. You'll get something soon. I'll be totally honest, I was probably spending half the time wondering if he'd be a good Peter Parker.
Is Ender's Game worth a watch?
The short answer is, yes. If you haven't read the books, chances are you'll probably watch this film, think its decent and enjoy the time you spent watching it. You've got good characters, a futuristic world with really cool effects, and you actually get surprised on how normal it seemed young children are in a setting that you would probably see in Star Wars or Star Trek.
The long answer I suppose is a little bit more difficult. Having read the book, knowing a broad idea of the story, I know that there was a lot of stuff missing from this film.
And that's to be expected. Ender's Game is a long book. Its a very well written book too, but long. The book takes place over a couple of years where the movie seems to take place over a couple of months.
Ender goes through a lot more trials and tests. You see different kinds of leaders throughout the book and Ender picks up different styles of leadership from each of them.
And that's the point of the story. This is something I realize now that I have completed ROTC and continue in my career in the military (not saying thats impressive at all). The book is about leadership. How do you find a proper balance between being the hard ass violent type that Ender experiences in the Salamander Team and the compassionate loving leader that his sister Valentine is.
There's a lot more psychological things he goes through in the book, and not just him, his friends. There's a lot that could have been put in this movie but it wasn't.
Now I don't know if I'm saying this because I actually think it, or because I know what else could have happened, but the movie at some points seemed rushed. He does experience other kinds of leaders but there's not totally enough time for him to process them and actually deal with them. He's just sent off to do his own thing. I don't think we were given enough time to actually tell what Ender is pulling from these examples he gets throughout the film.
I feel as though Ender's Game deserves a better direction. It needs to be turned into an epic. The result of this movie was not bad by any means, but it wasn't the level I think the novel really deserved.
I do like this film, don't get me wrong. I had a fun time watching it.
But I think the epicness of the story out weighed the scale this movie was able to go. This movie was made to appeal to young adults and science fiction readers when I really think the book goes farther than that.
Now, as I've said multiple times, I haven't read the book in a long time. Maybe I am blowing this story out of proportion and maybe this film was exactly what it needed to be to capture this book. But I don't think so. I think Ender's Game could be something huge but its too high of a risk to go overboard with. I don't think anybody on this project was thinking this was going to be an Oscar contending film and they made exactly what they were told to make.
Sorry if this is kind of a depressing way to end the review. Let's just go with the short answer. I liked this movie. The end.
But what did you think? Have you read Ender's Game? Did you think the movie did it justice? Comment and Discuss below! Also follow me on Twitter @cmhaugen24 there you can send me your thoughts on films, give me requests of movies I should review, and get updates on future reviews and movie news.
I'll leave you with this. Its kind of difficult to find videos about Ender's Game because its kind of obscure and nothing I can find is really funny or interesting... so I'm putting up a video about Harrison Ford! Here he's talking about his life and his career... enjoy!
I heard about this movie a long time ago and I thought it would be a good choice to see it... eventually.
I didn't really think I was going to pay money unless I was going to go with a friend and I thought it would eventually come to Netflix.. and it did.
Out of The Furnace is the story of Russell and Rodney Baze (played by Christian Bale and Casey Affleck, respectively).
Russell works at the local mill in small town Pennsylvania, while Rodney is a veteran with a gambling problem and in debt to a local criminal named John Petty (played by Willem Defoe).
Russ is the older brother and feels a sense of protection over his younger brother and decides to try and help Rodney get out of debt.
Right off the bat there's a good connection between Christian Bale and Casey Affleck. The two of them act as though they could be brothers. Is it the best relationship I've ever seen? No, but it is a decent relationship. With the events of the story, these two are on a little bit different tracks. They are connected because of their relationship, but honestly, there isn't enough in the film to totally develop them as brothers. They have a conversation or two while Russ is in prison (I'll get to that) and they have a conversation about Rodney's service to the country. Very good moments of development, but nothing mind blowing.
So as I was saying, Russ is responsible for the deaths of two people, one of them being a child, in a drunk car accident and is sent to prison. During his time in prison, his father dies, his girlfriend (played by Zoe Saldana) leaves him and gets pregnant with her new boyfriend, the police chief (Forest Whitaker).
Furthermore, Rodney is trying to pay back his debts by fighting in illegal matches for John Petty who is also in debt to crazy, meth head, wife beating, psychopath, Woody Harrelson.
So Russ gets released from prison and returns to work at the mill. At the same time there are tensions between him and his brother who wants to settle his debt to John Petty. He decides that he can do one last fight in the Appalachian mountains for Woody Harrelson and his crazy gang.
After a misunderstanding, John Petty is murdered by Woody Harrelson and after a horrible beating, so is Rodney.
The rest of the film is Russell dealing with the death of his brother, the restrictions of being a parolee, and whether or not he'll exact revenge on his brother's murderer.
As far as individual performances go, 2013 was a good year for Christian Bale. You had this film that gave him an opportunity to show off his acting chops in a very personal setting, while at the same time he did American Hustle that same year and got a nomination for an Oscar.
This performance wasn't nearly as good as American Hustle but it was still a pretty solid performance all around. While I said there wasn't much of a development between him and Casey Affleck's character, there was a lot of development of him personally.
Its just another testament to the acting ability of Christian Bale. The guy is just a good actor.
The main focus is on Bale and all the shit he has to go through as a character, dealing with being responsible for the death of two people, going to jail, losing his girlfriend, losing his brother. Its all just kind of a depressing story for Russell to go through. And despite that being a little bit redundant at times, Bale does it well.
Casey Affleck actually doesn't have as big of a part in the film as I think I would have liked. He does a good job but its not nearly as much as I would have liked to see from him.
The real performance worth mentioning is that of Woody Harrelson.
The guy is just down right talented.
I think I've been convinced of this ever since I've seen True Detective. He can do a complex character like the one he played in True Detective, he can play the light hearted lovable character he plays in Cheers, he can do Haymitch in Hunger Games, but then he turns around and just becomes a down right terrifying guy that you don't want to mess with.
His character isn't the most in depth character ever imagined but he's a drug dealer, criminal. He really doesn't have to be that complicated. As long as he's terrifying and creates a terrifying obstacle for the hero, I don't really give a shit who he is.
Overall the film is just a slightly better than mediocre crime drama. I'm finding its really hard to find a good crime drama movie because they're just done a little bit better on TV. You can have procedurals and story arcs that just make them more enjoyable. But I think Ou of the Furnace does its best to try and give the genre a little bit more flare and a little bit more credibility. Is it an incredibly good film? Not really. But its well acted, it had me interested, and I enjoyed watching it. Will I remember it in a couple days? Probably not. But seeing Christian Bale go up against Woody Harrelson is a win in my book so I'll give the movie a pass.
Honestly the movie is dark, its gritty, its depressing, but its alright. Not incredible, but alright.
But what did you think of Out of the Furnace? Comment and discuss below! Also follow me on Twitter @cmhaugen24 to give me your thoughts on the film, what I should review next, and get updates on movie news and reviews!
I'll leave you with this. I've been craving some new True Detective news and have been watching the teaser over and over for the past few days. Here's the new trailer that came out today! Enjoy!
Bottom Line: This movie did not have to be 3 hours long.
There are a lot of good things about this movie. I am not surprised that it was so critically acclaimed and that it was nominated for so many awards. I am also not surprised that it didn't win a single Oscar.
The Wolf of Wall Street is the true story based off the memoirs of Jordan Belfort (played by Leonardo DiCaprio).
From the get go, this movie is just off the wall on how ridiculous the lives of these New York Stock brokers are.
They're throwing little people with velcro onto a target. They're doing a crap load of drugs. They're
banging a lot of hookers. They're just going Kookoo bananas on the entire world and at the center of it is Jordan Belfort.
Although that's not how he started. He started as a mild mannered college graduate who decided to join the leagues of stockbrokers right at the time it was horrible to be a stockbroker with the crash of 87.
Down on his luck, he starts working for a penny stock company and takes everything he knows about selling stocks and begins making very good money. From there he gathers together a gang of low lives like Jonah Hill as Donnie Azoff, and basically begins a criminal organization under the guise of his own stock broker firm.
What follows is a very drawn out story of Belfort making "a fuck load" of money, marrying Margot Robbie because...
My god...
Doing a crap load of cocaine and other illegal drugs, all the while stealing money from people's pockets in pressure induced brokerage. And you may ask yourself.
Now you may ask yourself, this sounds like a great rags to riches to rags story and the fact of the matter is, it is. The thing that I like about DiCaprio is that he has now played two people who scammed the government and people out of a lot of money and after their prison time, they are now public speakers. He did with Catch Me If You Can, a movie I absolutely love. And now this movie, which I only kind of like.
The main goal of this film is to get some kind of empathetic reaction out of the audience for this
slimy salesman who knows exactly what he's doing, exactly how he's hurting people, and what he's doing is wrong, and could give less of a shit as long as the money is still coming in.
There's the story of the entrepreneur, willing to push people out of the way to get rich and his pride is ultimately his downfall. And while that story is in this movie, there is also this story of the animalistic nature of these people that if the rules are thrown out the window, what is the result.
And the result that Martin Scorsese and the writer's of this movie would say is... well... this...
And this is the most appropriate shot I can give. It just gets absolutely ridiculous.
The problem is, it goes so ridiculous for 3 HOURS!!!
I basically watched a Lord of the Rings film today and it was called The Wolf of Wall Street. And this isn't the case where I just didn't want to sit through a 3 hour long movie, there are just scenes in this movie that go on and on and on. Did I really need to see the movie turn into a disaster film when his yacht is sinking? No. Did I need to see the part where he thinks his aunt in law is hitting on him? No. And I have to say there were one too many scenes of him just partying, doing cocaine and hookers. We get it, this guy and his entire company were nuts.
The redeeming qualities of this movie was of course the performances of Leonardo DiCaprio and
Jonah Hill. The comedic timing of these two plus the rest of the cast made the movie incredibly entertaining and fast paced at times. And of course there's an irony to this all that they deliver perfectly.
DiCaprio himself, yells a lot. I wasn't totally sure why sometimes he would just leave the narration of the story to a background voice over and sometimes he would directly present to the camera. It had an air of Frank Underwood to it which is good, it was just inconsistent.
The character of Jordan Belfort is supposed to be flawed. You're suppose to see a deterioration of his morals. In actuality, you see him mild mannered one scene and then going to strip clubs and doing his slimy stockbroker ways next scene. It was not a subtle change.
All that being said, DiCaprio continues to be a powerful actor. I'm not surprised he didn't win an Oscar, especially in the year that the movie was nominated, especially in a year like 2013. But that's not to say its not a really good performance.
What's better is the relationship between him and Jonah Hill. While they both are scum of the earth
and you're not totally sure why you are rooting for them throughout the film, there is a great relationship there and while Belfort says there are no friends on Wallstreet, these two definitely are in the film.
On top of that, Hill is just nuts in this film. I'm not totally sure if he did a better performance than Jared Leto in Dallas Buyers Club (I still have to get around to it), but the nomination was well deserved.
The other characters in the stock broker world are hilarious. The best part about them is the humble, low life beginnings they come from. He gathers a bunch of weed dealers and turns them into incredible salesmen.
Bottom line is, the performances are not the problem of this film. Not at all.
And then there's Margo Robbie.
Now I'm not going to over blow this and say that Margot Robbie is the greatest thing since sliced bread because of her performance in this film. She's not. She's good. But she's not the best part of the movie. I mean she's the best part aesthetically speaking... I mean she's freaking gorgeous.
But she's not in the movie enough for me to say that she blew my mind. She didn't. Unfortunately, the thing that she's best known for in this film is how gorgeous she is and how great she looks naked.
HOWEVER. Its her last scene in the movie that makes me believe she has potential.
The last scene is her essentially (spoilers?) telling Belfort she wants a divorce and her responding to
Not a picture from that scene but you know what I mean
him losing his shit.
Its done very, very well.
Its not Oscar worthy, its not even mind blowingly good. Its just good. It gives me assurances that Margot Robbie is not just a pretty face, but she actually has some talent.
And now I get it. I get it why people had no criticisms over Robbie being cast as Harley Quinn. I don't have that much attachment to the character of Harley Quinn, but with what I saw here, I have no doubt that she could rock the role and suddenly, I'm ten times more excited about seeing that interpretation of the character in Suicide Squad.
But I'm not here to talk about comic book movies right now.
The fact of the matter is. The Wolf of Wall Street is a good movie. Cut out an hour of this film, and it could have been a great film.
Hopefully people understand that this movie is not glorifying the behavior of men like Belfort.
Its not saying that you should go out and do illegal things on the stock market.
If anything, its saying that there's a problem with the world of the stock market and things need to be changed. And if that's the point... well they could have done a little bit better job showing the problems with the low sentencing that comes with those crimes. Hell I think Get Hard did a better job pointing out the problems with stock brokers taking advantage of people than this movie did.
Maybe that's the point of the film, maybe its not. That's up to your interpretation of the film and that's the great thing about film.
I did like The Wolf Of Wall Street, just not as much as I think I was suppose to.
But what did you think? Comment and Discuss below! Also follow me on Twitter @cmhaugen24 to send me your thoughts on films and give suggestions for future reviews. You can also follow me to get updates on movie news and reviews.
I'll leave you with this. Its the honest trailer. What were you expecting? Enjoy!
SHIELD has been an intricate part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe since its beginning in Iron Man when Coulson name dropped his organization and comic book geeks went nuts.
Throughout all of phase 1, SHIELD is really the puppeteers behind everything. They're the ones setting up the Avengers initiative. They're the ones manipulating the situations that each Avengers gets his individual situation done but in the end, is headed towards the initiative and towards SHIELD's purposes.
Now let's be plain here. The Marvel Cinematic Universe is one where Norse Gods are actually aliens from another realm, a guy who flies around in an Iron suit, and a guy who when he gets angry turns into a green rage monster.
Believe me, if we lived in that kind of world, you would bet your ass that the United States government would allot funds to form a bureau like SHIELD in a heartbeat. And we'd probably need it.
But not only would they form it, I'm guessing they would want to keep it secret as much as they could. And even if people like The Avengers were public, I still think SHIELD would want to stay in the shadows, again holding the strings, being secret, and doing whatever they could to put the spotlight on The Avengers rather than them, the secret government organization holding all the strings.
And that sounds awesome. In theory, I should love a show like Agents of SHIELD because of that secret element to it. To me, SHIELD is to The Avengers the same way Torchwood is to Doctor Who.
Granted, I never really got into Torchwood. I never really liked the idea that a comedic character like Captain Jack Harkness was turned so dark. And in part, that's a huge problem I ahve with Agents of SHIELD.
But what I did like about Torchwood was that their presence seemed to be very hidden from the public. Sure the police would here stories about the organization called Torchwood, but any investigation or inquiry into Torchwood would be shut down quickly from higher, and nobody would actually know exactly the line of work Torchwood did. I think SHIELD should have been the same thing. SHIELD is like the CIA working domestically within the United States and abroad, dealing with the supernatural and basically fringe science. In fact, one of the first drafts of a post like this was me comparing Agents of SHIELD with Fringe and saying that I actually think the plot of Fringe would be a better plot for Marvel's Agents of SHIELD. But that's neither here nor there.
The main focus of this post is pointing out the elements of SHIELD throughout the Marvel Cinematic Universe that I think weaken their role in the cinematic universe. Here are the main reasons.
1. The mystery of SHIELD was lost very quickly.
Okay, maybe this is only because there's been 11 films in the cinematic universe across 7 years since Agent Coulson mentioned SHIELD in Iron Man.
And I actually have no problem with this introduction of them. The way I see it, the organization is just now gaining traction, its the first time its introduced in the film, Coulson needs to make his presence known.
Even in The Incredible Hulk, SHIELDs presence was still very behind the scenes, having Tony Stark in the post credit scene served as more of a personal connection between the two movies, acknowledging that they exist in the same universe, but still, its SHIELD remaining off the radar.
And then this BS happened.
This probably has to be the low point of Marvel just because this scene had to be the stupidest scene in the world, all because it had nothing to do with the plot. Why was Nick Fury the one who needed to get Tony back on track? How does that help the story, I mean you've hopefully read my Iron Man 2 review, you know how I feel about this.
But this scene really makes me not actually like Nick Fury in this entire cinematic universe.
You may be saying, Connor, its Samuel L Jackson as Nick Fury. He's made that role iconic. How can you not like him?
Well I like the idea of Nick Fury. And I do like where he eventually ended up. But I do think that Marvel played their cards a little bit too early with Nick Fury and kind of ruined him by the end of phase 1.
We all remember this scene at the end of Iron Man.
Seeing Samuel L Jackson with an eye patch utter the words, The Avenger Initiative... even if you're not a comic book fan, you should know that that means something brilliant is coming.
Samuel L Jackson shows up and he's just full of mystery. You have no idea what his deal is, who he is, but he just exudes awesomeness.
And I really think he should have been left to post credit scenes. Not showing up in a doughnut shop in Iron Man 2. He should have shown up at the end of Iron Man, and the end of Captain America. And that's it. By having him show up in Iron Man 2, it just ruins the illusion of this eye patch phantom that we get to know better in The Avengers as his gathering of heroes finally pays off and he is the narrator of their collaboration story.
But it goes beyond that.
While Iron Man 2 was the downfall of Nick Fury, and that can be easily remedied by... not watching Iron Man 2. (you really don't lose anything by not watching that movie looking back) SHIELD as a whole is not as easily fixed because instead of a secret organization that works in the shadows, SHIELD has a presence in every single Marvel movie. And its not like they come in and out like government ninjas, they're very present and people know about them.
In Thor, SHIELD is running around everywhere making their presence very known, setting up their very presence base to study Thor's hammer. Taking Jane's stuff and saying, don't worry, we're SHIELD we can do this. And what's worse is that Stellan Skarsgard's character knows who SHIELD is. Its not like he's never heard of this shady government organization taking his stuff, he's heard of them before.
I don't know, maybe I'm nitpicking one sentence, but then I look at Agents of SHIELD. SHIELD shows up everywhere, sticking their nose into peoples business. And its not like in the other films where they show up in their black unmarked vehicles, no SHIELD is riding around with that symbol that I thought only I knew about because I've been watching every film. People may not know exactly what SHIELD does, but the fact that that annoying but pretty girl from Agents of SHIELD can go around knowing exactly where to hack in, into an organization that's suppose to be covert, I don't know. It just doesn't feel that covert to me.
Here's a better example.
In 24: Live Another Day, the CIA is operating on foreign soil. They're not suppose to be there and every operation that they do, they have to do it quickly, quietly, and with incredible precision because if they don't, they get discovered and their operations are compromised.
I feel like that's how SHIELD should be operating. If people knew there was an organization with as much power as SHIELD, they'd be up in arms. And yet everyone is walking around in suits, acting like its a regular government bureau. And maybe it is. Maybe that's the way they wanted it to be, but do we really want to see Nick Fury as the head of a run of the mill government bureaucracy, or do we want to see him as the head of covert organization working from behind the scenes to make superheroes look good, but also keeping them in line.
And that's maybe the second problem I have with SHIELD.
2. It got too big, too quickly.
Exhibit A
This is not the equipment of a secret covert organization, this is the equipment of a paramilitary organization.
And you know I would have been okay if there was only one of these. Like we saw only one in The Avengers, that's freaking awesome, why would we need to see more....
Again, Paramilitary organization or covert operations. You can't have both. Again, I would have been fine if there was one of those things flying around with its cool stealth mode underbelly, but when there's like five of these in the air, people are going to notice.
This kind of ties into the whole mystery of the organization. I mean by The Winter Soldier, SHIELD is very much an entity I know of. The mystery is going to be gone for me, but I should still feel like I'm in on an exclusive club of people who know about SHIELD.
How in the world are there people who don't know about SHIELD when its that big that they can make 5 huge aircraft carriers.
And finally on a more personal note. SHIELD kind of ruined Coulson for me.
3. Coulson
Leading up to The Avengers, Coulson was a great comic relief character that showed up every once in a while. While he was a little bit goofy, he still had an air of seriousness to him, and he also was the representative of something greater, that same greatness that Nick Fury hinted at at the end of Iron Man.
It was Coulson and Nick Fury that kind of tied all of this together and was the glue of the Avengers Universe.
So much that there was a point when I was watching The Avengers, that I stopped the DVD and just had to marvel at how much I loved Coulson's role in this movie. He's so passionate about the way the Avengers inspire people because he's one of the people they have inspired. He has the Captain America trading cars, he's a fan just like we are.
And on the acting side of things, Clark Gregg is such a great choice for this role. You can tell he was brought in because of his relationship with Joss Whedon and I have no problem with that because I like Clark Gregg. I like his acting, I like his personality. I think he worked really well for this part.
And that's why it was such a big deal when he was killed in The Avengers. He really was the catalyst for getting the group together and having them go to stop Loki.
And it had to have been hard for Gregg to see his time with Marvel come to a close as his character is killed. I have to imagine by this point he's gotten to know the people he's worked with a lot and its probably a family. It had to have been hard to... Oh wait.
He didn't die!
Joss Whedon recently did an interview stating that he kind of regrets bringing Coulson back in Agents of SHIELD because if you watch both that show and the movies, you re-watch The Avengers knowing that Coulson doesn't actually die. Suddenly the impact of that death isn't quite the same.
On top of that, going back to the feeling of Agents of SHIELD. Coulson used to be this kind of comic relief character. He was brave, and serious to a fault, but he was never the kind of person you would never really see as intimidating. Furthermore, you don't really see him as the leader of a group.
But that's what they go for in Agents of SHIELD... and I don't like it.
Why would you take a lovable side character like Coulson and turn him into this hard nosed leader?
Now is that probably part of his job? Yeah it is, but I don't want to see that! He's a side character for a reason. Some side characters are the kind that you delve into, some aren't. Coulson was a character you really didn't need to dive into.
If you can't tell, I really don't like Agents of SHIELD.
And that kind of brings me into my last point.
Throughout all the movies, throughout all the TV shows, throughout it all. There is something about SHIELD that I have not enjoyed.
4. They're not good at their jobs.
Half the reason Coulson was such a good character was because, prior to Agents of SHIELD, Coulson was kind of like John Turturro's character from Transformers, the agent that does the secret research on transformers. I always though of Coulson as the good version of that character.
But the fact of the matter is, he's also similar to that character because SHIELD is ultimately useless in phase 1. Think about it for a second, what do they actually do in phase 1.
They try to stop Obidiah Stane in Iron Man 1 and fail miserably. They need to send Tony Stark to tell General Ross to back off of Bruce Banner at the end of Incredible Hulk. They just show up for the sake of showing up in Iron Man 2. They set up a "secret" facility in New Mexico that is easily infiltrated by Thor and Loki in Thor. They get their asses handed to them by the Asgard robot that attacks the small town in New Mexico.
What does SHIELD do right in Phase 1?
Well they form the Avengers?
Oh right, an initiative they were originally going to scrap and only pulled out of the recycling bin because their weapons program with the tesseract (which they lose by the way) wasn't ready yet.
And what was SHIELD doing during the battle of New York? This paramilitary organization? They were dicking around in their aircraft carrier. They couldn't send SHIELD agents down to New York with the Avengers. There's probably a couple SHIELD agents that could shoot at aliens the same way Hawkeye and Black Widow did. Maybe not as acrobatic but it'd be kind of nice to have some extra hands for Captain America to direct during that battle.
And what is SHIELD's response to the battle of New York?
Well Nuke New York of course.
I mean I know Nick Fury wasn't on board with that and it was more the shady board of directors who made that decision, but damn. That's your course of action?
SHIELD doesn't do anything in Iron Man 3 or Thor: The Dark World because they're too busy with... whatever they do in Agents of SHIELD. Seriously, what is their main goal in that show? I really don't like that show.
And then in The Winter Soldier, its revealed that Hydra has been manipulating SHIELD for fifty years!
Seriously! What the hell has SHIELD done in this Marvel Universe that makes them a viable government organization?
I mean I get it, the focus is on the superheroes, but this organization is really bad at its job. Its not a secret organization at all. It did nothing productive in the first phase of movies because it was too busy developing weapons that never saw the light of day, and spent all of phase 2 doing episodic crime procedurals that I swear to god make me fall asleep every time, all leading up to figuring out you've been infiltrated this entire time by Nazis.
I will say that Nick Fury does have some redeeming qualities in Age of Ultron, and without giving anything away, there is a point where Captain America refers to something as, "This is what SHIELD is suppose to be".
I think they finally did get something right at the end of the day, but thats 11 movies in.
Is there a little bit of sarcasm in this post? Sort of. I still think Nick Fury is pretty cool and again, the concept of SHIELD is really great and the execution of it isn't the worst thing in the world, especially if you don't think about it too much. But I've been trying to figure out what it is about Agents of SHIELD that makes it so difficult for me to get through it and maybe its my harsh feelings towards SHIELD throughout the eleven movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe that have soured me.
What do you think? Comment and Discuss below! Do you like SHIELD, do you think they've done a good job? Let me know. Also follow me on Twitter @cmhaugen24 to get updates on movie news and reviews.
I'll leave you with this. It is May the Fourth and I feel like a horrible Star Wars fan. I really haven't done anything to celebrate Star Wars, a franchise that has been incredibly important to me since childhood. So in honor of May the Fourth, I'll put an obligatory Star Wars clip, not related at all to SHIELD or Marvel, but hey, both are owned by Disney so... that's cool. Enjoy and May the Fourth be With you!
