Jupiter Ascending

I'm a pretty big Science Fiction guy, I love original stuff, I love new worlds to explore, and I also have enjoyed a lot of the work the Wachowskis have done. I've done two reviews on Cloud Atlas, I love the first Matrix, I find the sequels entertaining, I love V For Vendetta. There's a lot of work that they have done that I've really, REALLY enjoyed.

I have also criticized the Wachowskis on trying to be preachers instead of story tellers. I've praised their work on V for Vendetta and the first Matrix because they were good movies with good action and yeah they had a point to them but they didn't beat you over the head with their philosophy like their other films do.

But I've done enough posts on that, let's talk about the great big pile of... something that is Jupiter Ascending.

Jupiter Ascending is really kind of incredible. On one hand, I do have to give the Wachowskis some credit. They really do create this visually stunning world, filled with a lot of characters, creatures, and a rich sci fi yet fantasy-like environment that I think I was drawn to when I first saw the trailers for this movie.

But then they turn it around and make you really want to get away from this world, this world that should be really creative and fun, but instead is incredibly boring and annoying.

The movie focuses on the story of Jupiter Jones (played by Mila Kunis). Now I wouldn't think that was a stupid name so much if Jupiter Jones was an interesting character. I think a lot of heroes had stupid names but they get away with it because they're such likable characters. Jupiter Jones is a boring as hell character.

And here's the thing. I like Mila Kunis. Sure her filmography isn't exactly the greatest thing to brag about but she's been in some good movies and I think she's given some good performances. And the truth is, I don't think its totally her fault. Like I said, the character of Jupiter Jones is boring as hell.

The problem is, you can kind of tell that Kunis is just as bored as we are.

And don't expect her to get any better as the movie goes on. She goes from boring to damsel in distress, to boring, to damsel in distress again. For a movie that is named after her, you'd think that she would actually be a strong female character, but no. She just gets thrown from one bad guy to the next, doesn't do anything, and waits to be rescued by Channing Tatum.

Anyways, Jupiter is a very attractive girl from Earth who inexplicably has the shittiest job in the world. She works with her family to clean houses. I'm not saying its a bad choice of a profession, but I just don't buy Mila Kunis doing it.

But anyway, Jupiter of course dreams for something more... until aliens come...

Really generic looking aliens...

But along with them come a slew of bounty hunters and other aliens trying to kill Jupiter. And instead of being a strong hero or doing anything for herself, Jupiter has to wait, get captured, and wait until Channing Tatum comes in to save her.

Now, to give the movie as much credit as I can stretch, Channing Tatum and Sean Bean are probably the best parts of this movie. Only because they're kind of space police... or something like that and its the inkling of some creativity in their backstories and who they are that make me kind of interested. Like I hate to say it, but if you weren't going to make a good original movie about a strong female protagonist, could you at least made a generic alright movie about Channing Tatum and Sean Bean, the spliced space cops who are half wolf (in Tatum's case) and half bee (in Bean's case)? It that too much to ask.

But no, Tatum is Caine Wise. Again, a half man half wolf who is a disgraced space cop. There's an actual term for it but since this movie decided to piss away all its creativity, I'm not giving it any credit there.

He's hired to rescue Jupiter and from the other galactic bounty hunters.

And that was the kind of interesting part.

And then these bozos come in. These are the three siblings of the Abrasax siblings. These three are members of a family who I guess are royalty... or galactic business moguls... or something. They apparently are the heirs to a number of systems in our galaxy, including Earth.

Now, there's a lot of bullshit that goes into explaining this storyline, but the short story is, their mother owned Earth. Unfortunately for them, their mother wrote herself into her own will and none of them have possession of Earth. Now why do they want Earth you ask? Well again, that gets into really confusing and convoluted shit, but basically they want to harvest humans who live on different systems and Earth is almost ripe for Harvest.

And get this, the reason they want Jupiter, is because they believe that Jupiter is their mother reincarnated...

God dammit Wachowskis.

Now listen, if it were any other director, this would have actually been an interesting idea. I would have actually been on board for this plot line and thought that it was actually kind of creative. However, since its the Wachowskis, I just roll my eyes and watch them hash up the same god damn thing they keep on trying to has up. And here's the thing, they've only delved into reincarnation once, maybe twice (I haven't seen all their movies), but since its so prevalent and something they're so gungho about, I'm going to give them shit. 

So yeah, I rolled my eyes when I heard the bit about her being the reincarnated version of their mother. 

But that's not even the stupidest part about these three. 

The lengths that these three go to get their inheritance is just kind of odd. And the process of Jupiter

taking her title as Queen of the Universe (I'm not even joking about that, that's really what it is) is just bureaucratic and dumb... for absolutely no reason.

And it just doesn't fit with the theme and atmosphere of this movie. They spend the first part of this movie shooting, fighting, and trying to kill Jupiter and then the middle half is bureaucratic bullshit.

The best comparison I heard was comparing this movie to Star Wars: The Phantom Menace.

You've got Star Wars, the space opera, the fantasy in space, this brilliant original wonder, and what do they do in the first prequel? Tax disputes...

Same with this movie, you've got this rich, robust, creative world, full of aliens, and half men half wolves, and bee men, and lazers and all this cool shit, and then you have... inheritance politics... and bureaucracy...

Now listen, I don't have a problem with trying to create a world that has some realism to it. I actually like that Star Wars introduced the Senate, and the government of the Old Republic. What I didn't like was how long they spent in the Senate talking about trade disputes. And the same goes for this movie.

If you've got this huge budget and these beautiful effects, and this seemingly original idea, and you want to create a new world, akin to that of Star Wars... why would you follow in the footsteps of one of the worst Star Wars movies out there?

For the record, I actually really love Phantom Menace, not because I think its an especially good movie, but because its Star Wars. Jupiter Ascending doesn't get that pass. You have to build a rich world and a narrative around the pretty colors and visuals, and build trust before you're able to get away with something like that, and for a lot of people, Phantom Menace didn't even get away with that.

But anyways, like I said, the reason this movie doesn't get any passes is because its just boring. Jupiter and Caine are boring characters. We're suppose to root for them, like them as characters, and suddenly when they apparently fall in love, you're suppose to get invested with this romance... and its just not possible.

Then you've got the siblings who are overly convoluted and boring due to their inheritance politics and bullshit like that.

But if there's one thing this movie gave us, its this. It gave us doubt in Eddie Redmayne's ability as an actor.

Like I said, this movie is really incredible.

Three months earlier, we got Redmayne in a phenomenal performance as Stephen Hawking in The Theory of Everything. Redmayne is powerful in that movie, he's moving. Furthermore, Redmayne has shown that he's talented. Regardless of what you thought of Les Mis, he's shown that he can sing, and I actually thought his acting was good too.

And then this movie comes out and we all kind of question whether or not that Oscar that he won for Best Actor should have actually gone to him.

The best part about it is, Redmayne's character in Jupiter Ascending is played off as the main antagonist of the film. He dresses in black, he's the most evil looking of all the siblings... and yet he's barely in the movie. And when he finally does his bad guy thing, he does the exact same plan his siblings did before. He's not even a good villain. Some movies are bad but at least the bad guy is entertaining. Redmayne is just boring. He could put you to sleep if he didn't randomly yell... for absolutely no reason. Its just this great combination of whispering and yelling that is hilarious.

Now, I think this performance will not hurt Redmayne one bit and he's actually gonna be the star of the new Harry Potter spin off which I'm actually looking forward to, but it doesn't disguise the fact that this performance is really... really awful. I don't pay attention to the Razzies at all, but I can say without a doubt, they'll do something about Redmayne's performance with this movie.

The fact of the matter is, Jupiter Ascending is just a bad film through and through. There's really not that much that is redeemable about this movie. Its pretty obvious what went wrong and what could have been done to make it better.

The characters are boring, especially the main one. The environment is pretty but not explained in any way that is interesting or gets me invested in the story. The plot is overly complicated and convoluted, and the performances are really kind of abysmal. And its a bummer because I feel like the Wachowskis had something here. I don't know if it was something really good, but it could have been something better.

Personally, I think they fall into the same trap that they fell into with the Matrix sequels and that is getting bogged down with their hit you over the head message. The big message in this one is consumerism. Its bad. But its just lazy how they do it. They sacrifice story for this hit you over the head message and the pay off is really nothing.

There's really not much more I can say about Jupiter Ascending. Its just bad. What do you think? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on this movie and others on my Twitter @cmhaugen24. There you can send me your thoughts and send me requests for films I should review in the future. You should follow me to get updates on future movie news and reviews.

I'll leave you with this. The honest trailer pretty much gives away the plot... but that's okay. Enjoy!

Winter's Tale

For one reason or another, I really wanted to see Winter's Tale. I saw the trailers for it and I thought it was something that was really interesting, creative, and new that I thought would have a lot of fun fantasy elements to it and maybe be a fun ride. I'm a fan of Colin Farrell and Russell Crowe, I like the fantasy elements I saw in the trailer, it definitely seemed like it was worth a watch.

Winter's Tale stars Colin Farrell as Peter Lake. He's an orphan kinda abandoned by his Russian immigrant parents who were denied access to the United States and on their way out, sent him in a small boat back to the States so he could have a chance living there. So abandoned is a bad way to phrase it but yeah.

Anyway, he grows up to become an expert mechanic/ thief and ends up pissing off the wrong people. Namely a gangster by the name of Pearly Soames (played by Russell Crowe). Now here's where things take a little bit of a turn. See Pearly is actually some sort of demon or fallen angel and that's how he runs his mob. He's also pretty much immortal so... there's that. Anyway, Lake finds himself on the run from Pearly and in order to escape, he finds a magical horse who can fly...

Have I lost you?

Now I'm gonna be totally honest, this horse is not explained at all, he's just a horse who can fly. He kinda shows up when its convenient and again, he doesn't make a whole lot of sense. But its a cool visual watching the horse fly.

Anyway, then you've got this woman named Beverly Penn (played by Jessica Brown). She lives with her family, her father, a wealthy newspaper editor (played by William Hurt) and her younger sister Willa.

I'm not sure if its giving too much away but Beverly is dying of consumption. Now I'm not totally sure this movie totally knows what consumption is and I don't think they're totally accurate in their attempts to keep Beverly alive but it makes for a kind of whimsical elements I guess that she has to keep her body temperature down by living outside or else she gets too warm or something.

Have I lost you?

Anyways, before Peter decides to get the hell out of New York... because apparently that's the boundary for Pearly. He decided to rob one last house and it happens to be Beverly's. They meet, they pretty much fall in love at first sight, and from that point on, Peter is smitten with Beverly.

Now Listen...

I'm not opposed to love at first sight stories. I think that if done correctly, they can work really well with the narrative and work for the story. But you have to, first, have the two characters who are falling in love have absolute chemistry from the beginning, and second, I need to believe that they are in love.

I believed that these two loved each other... but it wasn't until half way through the film where they really start to spend time with one another.

There's a point where William Hurt asks Peter what his intentions are for his daughter and Peter just says, I love her terribly. And I was kind of like, woah... when did this happen? Their first interaction, while cute, wasn't exactly convincing that this guy was absolutely in love with Beverly.

Like I said though, the movie does do a better job at convincing me these two are in love later on in the film. I almost wish that the film would have made them develop their relationship as opposed to just chalking it up to love at first sight.

But anyways, a lot of stuff happens after that point and I don't want to get too much into spoiler territory, firstly because I do think this movie is worth seeing if not for just the originality and the visuals, but also because its very hard to explain this movie. There's demons, and miracles, and angels, and magic, and even an element of time travel... sorta. (that's a little misleading saying Time Travel)

Without giving too much away, eventually the movie goes to the present day and Jennifer Connelly is in it.

From the trailers I thought that the segment in the present was going to be a much longer segment but it actually was really only the last half hour of the movie. I understand now why people say this movie stars Colin Farrell and Russell Crowe instead of adding Connelly in it because honestly, she's only in the last act of the film.

I liked the way it went, I just think I would have been interested in seeing this story move into the present a little bit more. I don't know if they didn't because of the book or what, but it was an interesting move. Do I agree with all the decisions made in this movie, especially in the segment set in the present, well no. Without giving too much away, I'll just say... Amnesia... that is all.

One part of the movie that is worth mentioning is a little cameo. I won't say who he plays but Will Smith is oddly enough in this movie.

And listen, I think the part was necessary to the film, I think the character is interesting and I actually would have liked to see more of him, but it was just confusing as Smith doesn't really look like he's actually in the film. Its like they were filming, saw Smith walking by and were like, "Hey Will Smith, you wanna be in our movie?"

Like he really looks like he didn't even have a costume for this film. It really looks like he came off the street, filmed his scenes and walked out, grabbing his paycheck as he went.

Now again, he's not bad in the role. I'm just not totally sure why it was Will Smith and why they didn't give him a costume or make him look like the character he was suppose to play.

It was just... weird.

Anyways... This movie is pretty challenging to explain, one without giving too much away, and two because its a really original and a little difficult to wrap your head around concept. And part of that is because a lot of the fantasy elements are not really explained.

There are always rules that go along with any fantasy piece of fiction. Now you have to be careful when you're writing fantasy in how you explain those rules. Sometimes its easy to just have a giant montage in the beginning and explain all the rules there. But sometimes that's a little bit too on the nose and it doesn't always make for a good movie.

But if you don't explain those rules, the audience can get confused. And that was kind of the case with Winter's Tale. Things like the horse were never really explained and I'm sure they are in the book. The good part about this film is that it has made me want to go out and check out the book. Maybe things will make more sense then. But a movie should be self contained and explainable by itself. And there are times when Winter's Tale isn't that explainable.

Now does that negate from the fact that this is a really interesting and original idea? No. I love the look and feel of this movie. The cinematography was great, again the fantasy elements are interesting and it does make for an interesting, if not confusing story. But that is something the movie struggles with.

Overall, I liked Winter's Tale. I'm the kind of person that likes writing fantasy like this and I draw a lot of inspiration from movies like this. I have to ask myself, did I get more inspiration from the trailer or did I get more inspiration from the movie? I don't know, it might be worth another watch just to get everything from it and not be so confused.

But anyway, I enjoyed Winter's Tale. Its not a perfect movie but its a fantasy romance you could watch with your significant other, or not (in my case) and you'll still have a good time.

The performances were good, the visuals were good, and its very original.

But what do you think? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24. There you can send me your thoughts on Winter's Tale and other films, and you can also send me request for films I should review in the future. Follow me to get updates on future movie news and reviews.

I'll leave you with this. I've been doing a bad job at getting you guys videos at the end of these posts. This is a little bit of stretch, but think about it this way. Russell Crowe is in this movie. Crowe was also in Les Mis. In that movie he had a really funny death. I like videos from Cracked. Cracked did a video on that very subject. Enjoy!

Next

Nic Cage is really an American treasure... or should I say... a National Treasure...

I mean, this and many other videos really speak for itself. Nic Cage is just a great example of overacting and its really amazing that he just continues to get work and continues to be hilarious while doing it.

Cage is really notorious for being in bad movies and just making them entertaining. Now, to be fair, I think that Cage has done a pretty great mixture of work and I don't think all of his work is bad. I think he's entertaining nonetheless and its still a wild ride when you watch his movies.

An example of a movie that isn't a bad movie but definitely has some qualities of a bad Nic Cage movie is Next.

Based off a science fiction short story, Next is the story of Chris Johnson (played by Cage) a magician in Las Vegas. Johnson is special because he has the ability to see two minutes into his own future. He's able to see things before they happen and he uses that to be a successful magician and keep a low profile as he doesn't want his ability to be discovered.

Meanwhile, a Russian nuclear bomb has been stolen and the FBI is looking for it. Special Agent Callie Ferris (played by Julianne Moore) has heard rumors of Chris Johnson and wants to utilize him to find out where the nuke is prior to its detonation and save the US from facing a horrible event like that. But Johnson is very tentative to have his ability used for the gain of government. I guess there's a backstory to that but they don't really go into it at all.

All the while, Johnson keeps on having visions of a diner and a woman coming into his life. This woman is played by Jessica Biel and she is your damsel in distress for the evening, Liz Cooper.

Though they have never met, Johnson is insistent that he's meant to be with Liz without knowing anything about her.

What follows is really one of the most uncomfortable and forced romances. Just watching Cage and Biel, a woman almost 20 years his minor, try and fall in love, and in a matter of like 10 minutes, not even joking about that, is both unconvincing and actually kind of creepy at times.

The truth is, Cage is actually pretty mellow in this movie, he doesn't have the over-the-top performances that you've seen, if not you saw in the video above. Instead he has a very low key and a little bit creepy performance of him delivering these really weird lines and giving these really creepy looks, especially putting into account his hair in this movie.

So Nic Cage and Jessica Biel "fall in love" but they're torn apart by the terrorists trying to stop Johnson from helping the FBI and being on the run from the insistent Callie Ferris.

And when I say insistent, I mean really, REALLY insistent. She is convinced that the only way to stop this nuke is to get this guy who they can't even prove actually has this ability. Sure she really thinks he does, but her FBI friends and bosses all are skeptical. I'm actually kind of amazed that she gets away with all of this because I mean, yeah he does have that ability, but the other people at the FBI don't know that. Any normal person would have fired Ferris on the spot. But some way or another, she gets away with the whole, this guys psychic so we should follow him plan.

On top of that, she's kind of a boring character. She's just the FBI agent. She has no character outside of that. And that's kind of a theme among all the characters. Jessica Biel is just the damsel in distress. The terrorists are just your run of the mill bland terrorists. Even Nic Cage is just your hero. We don't know too much about him besides the fact that he can see 2 minutes into his future and that's cool.

And that's really what the movie focuses on. Like I said in my review of Underworld, the focus isn't so much focused on the characters or the story so much, its more focused on the effects and the action that goes along with these amazing individuals.

And I will give the movie credit, the effects and use of Johnson's clairvoyance is actually done really well. Its half the reason I think this movie is actually kind of a fun movie. The way that the movie utilizes his time viewing abilities and the way he uses it to fight terrorists is done very very well.

And the funny part is, the movie doesn't really try to be anything more than a mindless action movie. Like I said, the characters are pretty lame and one dimensional and there's nothing incredibly interesting or worth investing in.

And the weird thing is, this movie could have been longer, it could have had more in it but it limited itself to 90 minutes. Honestly, it feels like a two hour pilot to a TV show, and I kind of feel that's where they should have put their effort into instead of a movie.

I mean the prospects of a TV show about a clairvoyant guy working with the FBI to hunt down terrorists, I'd watch the shit out of that, especially if it starred Nic Cage. I know it probably won't star Nic Cage but can we make this happen?

Anyways, Next is a 90 minute pilot to a TV show that doesn't exist. Its got a lot of good action with characters with no story or emotion, and Nic Cage's hair is really kind of awful. However, it is a dumb action flick worth giving a watch if you like the sci fi genre and are looking for something different.

I'm going to warn you though, the ending is bullshit. Complete bullshit.

But those are my thoughts on Next. What do you think? Comment and Discuss below. You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24. There you can send your thoughts on Next and other movies to me directly and send me requests for future films to review on my blog. Follow me to get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of the blog.

I'll leave you with this. Since I just wrote my Underworld review and Nic Cage is in this one, there must be some kind of connection. Here's Nic Cage responding to rumors that he is a vampire. Its not a great video... I'm sorry I'll get a better video next time. Enjoy!

Underworld

I've never really been into Vampires.

And believe me, I've tried. I have tried to look past Twilight, I've tried to find the good vampire movies, the fiction, the mediums with vampires that have been proclaimed good. I watched about 4 seasons of Buffy The Vampire Slayer, I've watched Joss Whedon vampires for god's sake and I'm still kind of lukewarm on the whole subject.

Now there's a whole other post I can do on Buffy and Joss Whedon, but the point is, I'm not a huge fan of vampires. I am however, a fan of action franchises that refuse to die. Not because they're particularly good, but because they're entertaining to watch. How they begin, how and how they end up. An example of this is the Die Hard franchise, or the Matrix. Another example, is Underworld.

Underworld takes place in your typical dank and dark vampire world where a war has been taking place between the Vampires and the Lycans.

Now, right off the bat, why they call them Lycans instead of werewolves, is really kind of beyond me. I guess werewolves was to... simple?

Anyway, this war has been going on for centuries and the Vampires seem to be victorious. Our main character Selene (played by Kate Beckinsale) is a Death Dealer Vampire. They're the ones that have been hunting down the Lycans. They also seem to losing their jobs soon as the Lycans are pretty rare. She's apart of a Coven of Vampires led by a vampire named Kraven (played by Shane Brolly). Kraven's a horribly acted character but he's quite important as he wants to name Selene his Queen and rule the Vampire coven while there's a big ceremony of sorts to awaken some old Vampires or something, its a little confusing the rituals of the vampires but the point is, she doesn't want to be his Queen.

In a battle with the Lycans, Selene runs across a human by the name of Michael Corvin (played by Scott Speedman). Michaels also a pretty horribly acted character, but he's very important as the Lycans want to capture Corvin for unknown reasons.

Selene begins a journey, against the wishes of Kraven and the Coven, to find Michael, protect him from the Lycans, and figure out why the Lycans want him. All the while, she apparently begins falling in love with him... I guess. That's something that was always in the descriptions of this movie and how it was such a torn romance she was feeling, but in all honesty, I didn't see any chemistry or even an indication that these two were interested in each other outside of one kiss they share which is really one of the laziest onscreen kisses I've seen in a long time.

Anyways, she's eventually given a choice, everything she's ever known in her Coven, or this guy that she's barely met but seems to have something about him that is special.

Now, the fun part about this movie is that the supporting characters and the people who represent these two warring factions, are actually pretty good actors. Bill Nighy plays Viktor, the elder vampire who is awakened by Selene when they need guidance of how to face this Lycan threat.

Probably the coolest character of the movie is in fact the antagonist of the film, Lucien (played by Michael Sheen).

I mainly know Sheen from Frost/Nixon and some other stuff. He's this classically trained actor and I've actually really come to like his work (Outside of Twilight). I obviously haven't seen enough to really say that he's a great actor but I really enjoyed him in this film. And that was unexpected as when I first saw him on screen I was like, "OH... hey Michael Sheen!"

But while the rest of the movie is just kind of treating itself like a mindless action movie with mindless action figures doing what they need to do to keep moving and entertain, Sheen actually tries to convey something and I actually found his character really interesting.

Nighy is also a really entertaining part of the movie. While I don't think he's the best villain in the world, he does convey a sort of Palpatine-esc persona and is entertaining. You could kind of tell from the get go that this guy was going to end up a villain (spoiler?) but that's kind of the entertaining part of it.

Which kind of makes this movie ride a difficult line. Its a time before Vampires were sparkly and more likable. So in a way you know that the Vampires can all be good guys.

And that kind of leads me into the style of this movie.

For some reason, nobody can really get away from the idea that Vampires always have to dress like goth fancy emo people. The look of all these vampires is so cliche and so dated that it doesn't exactly hold up over a decade later. And the weird thing is, Vampires still look like this!

I mean yeah, Edward wears a V-Neck, but you throw him in Underworld, give him a leather jacket and he fits right in. I'm not totally sure if I mean this in a way that discredits this movie or compliments it for continuing a precedent and doing it successfully, but the style of movie just kind of reminded me of a manlier version of Twilight. The point is you could do a crossover here and nothing would look out of place... in fact can we do a crossover where Bella gets shot by Selene... that'd be cool.

Speaking of shooting, there is another element of this movie that makes it a little bit different and that is the immense amount of leather and gun play...

Again, imagine Twilight but much manlier and with the costumes and action of the Matrix.

And that's kind of why this movie is a little bit entertaining.

Yeah the characters are dull, yeah there's no much of a story, but there's so much Matrix-like action and lots of fantasy gun play that it actually becomes a little bit entertaining. I'm still kind of amazed that with the critical response to these movies that there were two sequels, a prequel and two sequels still on the way, but that's what action franchises do sometimes.

Now you may be asking yourself why I haven't talked too much about Kate Beckinsale in this movie as it really is her movie. And the truth is, besides the fact that she looks great in leather, Kate Beckinsale is really kind of boring in this film.

She does that quiet British voice that makes her sound like a badass, which she is, but she's not really that interesting of a character and really takes a backseat to the action going on around her. She's just kind of the spectator of this war going on between the Lycans and the Vampires. If she wasn't in the movie, it really wouldn't have made much of a difference and that's not really a great quality to have as a protagonist of a film. She's by no means bad and I'm actually looking forward to her in future films, but what I'm saying is that she's not exactly the most elaborate or complicated hero in cinematic history, she's not even that memorable to be honest.

But if you haven't figured out yet, I was entertained by Underworld. Its not really a great movie at all. Its a little bit dull at times and the acting, save a few people who have since gone on to do good things (Sheen, Nighy and even Beckinsale), is actually quite bad. The saving grace of the movie really is the action. I think the tone is a little bit dated and doesn't hold up today, but the action, inspired by the Matrix and other action films of the time really does make the movie at least a little bit fun.

Last thing I'll say is that I really feel like this movie is trying to be more than a mindless action franchise (which it is) and the movie did feel a little bit long. A lot happens in this film and then you look at your watch and realize that it hasn't even been an hour of this two hour long movie. I think a little of the film could have been cut down.

The movie itself is not horrible but you can kind of tell that its the kind of movie that wants to have a sequel and you can kind of tell already that the sequels are going to be garbage. But at the same time, it is entertaining and I am interested in watching the next sequel on Netflix.

I never spent money to go and see this movie and I don't plan to for future movies.

Hopefully, this franchise continues to be entertaining enough to get a good yuck or two out of it and hopefully its not a waste of time continuing on in this franchise.

But those are my thoughts on Underworld. What do you think? You can comment and discuss below, let me know what you think.

You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24. Send me your thoughts on this movie and any other movies that I have reviewed. You can also send me requests for future movies to review and I will make them my priority. Follow me on Twitter to get updates on movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I'll leave you with this. Its a short one, but its the How it Should Have Ended. And I thought the EXACT same thing when that scene was going on. Its really funny how on the note they can be. Enjoy!

Jurassic Park

You may think that since this is a review of Jurassic Park, this review is going to be long because there's so much to talk about. The truth is, I have a hard time reviewing movies that are as well known as Jurassic Park. I had a similar dilemma when I considered reviewing the Star Wars movies (both prequels and original). There are some movies out there that have been around for so long, and they're so well known that everything worth saying about movies like this have been said a billion times over. In the example of Star Wars films, there's not much of a point saying that Jar Jar Binks is an annoying character because every review of The Phantom Menace has said that exact thing a billion times over. The good thing is, the same thing can be said about a good movies and its good qualities.

And Jurassic Park is a perfect example of this. I mean there's a lot I could say in praise of this movie, but I have no doubt that its been said a billion times over as well.

However, I will try and give as much of a comprehensive review as I can, especially since this movie is really, really good.

In 1993, the great Steven Spielberg introduced us to the movie adaptation of Michael Crichton's novel, Jurassic Park.

I did end up reading the novel and I definitely recommend it. Like most of my reviews, I try not to compare too much between the book and movie. With this I'll just say the book was good and there are a couple differences. If you have the chance and the time, take a break from the movie watching and read that book because its definitely worth it.

As far as story goes for this movie, a group of experts have been gathered by the mysterious and wealthy John Hammond (played by the late Richard Attenborough). These experts include Dr. Alan Grant (played by Sam Neill) a paleontologist running a dig for dinosaur fossils, Ellie Sattler (played by Laura Dern) an expert in ancient botany, Dr. Ian Malcolm (played by Jeff Goldblum) a mathematician and chaos theorist. They are gathered by Dr. Hammond to be consultants for a new park Hammond is opening that has been having problems getting proper funding due to the possible dangers associated with it.

And its exactly what you think it is, its a park full of Dinosaurs. If you know anything about movies you know the basic premise of Jurassic Park but what you may not know (if you haven't seen it) are the simplistic but incredibly memorable characters, the stunning visuals that still hold up today, and the fascinating themes and ideas that make Jurassic Park more than a simple monster movie.

That is the one thing about Jurassic Park that fascinates me, people really build this movie up as a really deep movie with more ideas than scares and monster effects.

And while that has some truth to it, the actual truth is that Jurassic Park is in fact a monster movie. Pure and simple. Jurassic Park is a monster movie with dinosaurs in a park. The characters are going off and running away from a monster.

Now to be fair, they are beautiful monsters. The visuals of Jurassic Park really do hold up today, some would even say they hold up more than Jurassic World did. But what's so great about this movie and what I think makes it hold up is the wonder and amazement that comes when these people see the dinosaurs.

Jurassic World had a little bit of the wonder element but they also tried to put in the underlying idea that in this world of phones and texting, we just wouldn't be interested in dinosaurs the way we were in the 90s. While I like the idea, it really sacrificed the great scenes like the one in Jurassic World where Alan Grant literally is brought to tears by the sight of a dinosaur. When Ellie Satler has no words. These are the scenes that are iconic and unfortunately, little Iron man 3 up there just didn't provide enough wonder and amazement in Jurassic World.

But that goes back to the idea of characters in Jurassic Park.

These characters really are iconic and memorable. From Sam Neill as Alan Grant, to Jeff Goldblum as Ian Malcolm, to even the kids Tim and Lex. And the best part is, they're not so much characters as they are stereotypes.

And I don't mean that in the traditional ways stereotypes are used. In Michael Bay movies, characters are stereotyped by their race, or appearance. It can be entertaining but it also can be incredibly offensive... especially if its a Transformers movie.

But Jurassic Park taps into the archetypes as opposed to overt stereotypes. Dr. Alan Grant is the heroic Indiana Jones archetype. Ellie Satler is the strong heroine, probably one of the best the 90s could produce. Ian Malcolm is the jokester. Hammond is the ambitious old man character, and yeah they even have the stereotypical lawyer character. With the exception of making fun of lawyers, the archetypes are not offensive and while they are simple, they let you fill in the blanks with your imagination but giving you enough information on the characters to enjoy them and make them interesting. The combination of them all really make the movie entertaining and kind of make you forget the flaws and hallowness of the characters as a whole.

I mean I almost feel like I could wrap up the review right now because the movie is really, REALLY good. Prior to seeing the film, I was skeptical because of all the hype this movie garners. But sometimes when a movie has been beloved for over 20 years, you kind of have to start listening.

The story is fascinating, the characters are lovable, as I said before, the visuals still hold up today. and the Music... my god the music.

I tell you, the 70s, 80s, and 90s were a prime time for John Williams and you wouldn't think that a movie about dinosaurs would need such a great soundtrack but it really is an iconic theme.

These are the kinds of movies that you just want more and more of the more you think about it. Right after I finished watching it, I was actually thinking that I want to watch the movie again. I wanted to start watching the sequels which is sad because I've heard that those movies are not nearly as good as the first one. It makes me want to watch Jurassic World and see how it does really compare to the first movie.

The thing is, while this movie is incredibly entertaining and really was ahead of its time, it amazes me that when the 3rd sequel is released there is just as big of a reaction but the movie is only stated as okay, instead of a masterpiece.

It still baffles me how a movie can be the third highest grossing film in film history and yet get such mediocre reviews from critics. (That being said, Avatar is the number one film... so...)

The thing that fascinates me, especially after watching Jurassic Park, is that I believe that if Jurassic Park came out today, it would probably get the same reaction Jurassic World did. People would think its a good movie with a lot of heart, but not the best thing in the world.

Maybe they thought of that when they were making Jurassic World (I'm really interested in seeing that again with the refresher on Park) that times have changed since the release of Jurassic Park. We've spent so much time with CGI and stunning visuals that yeah, we think its fun to watch dinosaurs, but they don't blow your mind like they used to. Before 1993, the idea of dinosaurs you could interact with in a park and visually look as though they were there was really unheard of, now we're just so used to it that the wonder of dinosaurs still exists to make Jurassic World successful, but the visual experience is gone and the heart is gone as well to make it a classic.

I don't know if that makes any sense. I know that there is a difference between cinema today and in 1993, but let me know what you think. Is Jurassic Park really a great movie or was it just a product of its time and a breach of great visualization?

Comment and Discuss below. I'm sorry if this wasn't the grandieous review that you were expecting for Jurassic Park but I have a laundry list of things to do, including a bunch of reviews I'll hopefully be getting to in the next few days. Bear with me.

You can also send me your thoughts on Jurassic Park and other movies via my twitter @cmhaugen24 and send me your requests for future reviews. You can also follow me to get updates on future movie news and reviews.

I'll leave you with this. It's been too long since a post so I'm not gonna waste any more time than I need to. Here's the how it should have ended for the movie. Enjoy!