Sabotage

I'm still not totally sure what Sabotage is about. I'm going to try to explain it as best as I can but.. I don't even know.

Sabotage is a film starring Arnold Schwarzenegger as "Breacher", the leader of a special operations DEA task force. This team is compiled of the most rag tag, tatted badasses in the DEA and they're all just assholes.

Seriously, I did not like any of these characters. You've got Schwarzenegger who I guess sees this as his new family, and yet he just overlooks a lot of shit that goes on, like a meth addiction, and everyone wanting to have sex with one of the team members who is also the wife of another team member.

You got a lot of big names actually in this team. Or big...ish. You've got Sam Worthington, Joe Manganiello, Terrence Howard, Sawyer from Lost. And of course they fall into that stereotype of they're all so close that they're pretty much family.

At the beginning of the film, they're busting into a drug den and find a huge pile of money. They bust the place but not before hiding 10 million dollars in cash that they will split between them.

An investigation happens and because they're so close, nobody breaks and nobody ever figures out where the money went. Even the team members because the money suddenly vanishes before they can retrieve it.

Months later, Schwarzenegger is off probation, they're starting their job back up and then suddenly team members start to get brutally murdered one by one. This is where an FBI agent comes in (played by Olivia Williams) and she starts investigating the murders of these DEA agents.

The movie ends up being a whodunit and eventually the team start realizing that its actually a member of their team that is murdering everyone. Something that probably should have been obvious from the start and if they had focused on that from the beginning and not wasted my time thinking it was the cartel or something, this movie probably would have been at least a little bit more interesting.

Instead there's this convoluted plotline with the cartel and, the movie wants you to ask yourself, oh was it the cartel? But if you're smart, you probably already guessed it wasn't the cartel.

I don't know there's this whole deal about Arnold's family and how they were brutally murdered by the cartel. Its an important part of the film but its thrown in at the most inopportune times and it just doesn't flow with the rest of the movie. The parts where the movie was talking about Arnold's revenge on the cartel guys who killed his family seemed like a movie in itself. A movie that probably would have been more interesting than this mess of a crime mystery.

And then there's a point where they realize that it was somebody in the group and they basically say who it is... and they don't do anything. Its basically revealed who the bad guy is and they just let them drive away, like nothing happened. Its just a strange film with a lot of strange twists and turns that I suppose are trying to make the movie clever but in reality, its just a mess.

While you have a lot of big... ish names in this movie, its really not high caliber actors. I'll get to Arnold, but Sam Worthington I swear hit his peak at Avatar, I really don't think the man can do anything better than that movie. Joe M (I don't really want to spell out his entire last name) is good... ish, he's more of just a big guy that does action stunts. Mireille Enos plays Worthington's wife and she was just awful. Terrance Howard was in this movie! I used to think that man was talented but its shit like this that makes me question that idea. Olivia Williams plays the most uninterested police detective in the world. As bullets are flying she's got the same face of absolute calm, which I guess you could say she's collect under pressure, but there is literally no reaction from her on anything.

And then we have the Governor himself.

Schwarzenegger would probably be the first to tell you that he's probably not gonna be your choice for Shakespeare. The guy cannot act for shit. What he is good for is pulling off these action roles where he doesn't have to speak that much, he just needs to look cool shooting a gun, crack a one liner here and there, and kick ass.

The problem with this movie is that he's actually expected to show some emotion with this shit of a script. He's this guy whose family was brutally executed. He's suppose to be this ring leader, seeing his only true family murdered one by one. And of course, what does he do? He just gives that squint and give a blank stare. I'm sorry, maybe its a generational thing, but I've never understood why you would put Schwarzenegger as a main lead in a film. I'll talk more about this in my Total Recall review coming up, but I can see Schwarzenegger as the villain, or the badass mentor or something like that, but I've never understood him as a leading man.

And that German accent is still strong. As much as he wants us to believe that he is this badass American action hero, that god damn accent still haunts him and still kind of takes me out of it.

But let's be fair, Sabotage wasn't a film made to win Oscars, it was a chance to see these actors shoot a lot of bad guys and a lot of blood and gore to be spilled.

I guess it can be said that the action in this film is pretty good. Every once in a while you get these kind of cool shots and I suppose the action can be intense at times.

But honestly, many times, I just felt like this movie was a video game that I couldn't play. And without any real character development or any characters that I even really like and see as "the good guys", this movie just kind of falls flat and can be chalked up to a really bad shoot em' up film with little to no story. Plain and simple, this movie is just not good. The characters are dull and one dimensional. The acting is shit. The story is shit. The action, though sometimes fun, can be repetitive and become dull. The mystery is shit. The subplots are shit.

The thing that worries me about this film is that its directed by David Ayer.

David Ayer has a spotted track record. He directed Training Day which I personally think is one of the best crime thrillers out there. But then he did a movie like Street Kings. He did End of Watch which is a great film, I've heard great things about Fury...

And then he makes this movie...

The reason this worries me is because the guy is suppose to helm DC's Suicide Squad. Now I'm on pins and needles about all DC properties, especially Suicide Squad and Batman v Superman because they hold the future of the franchise in their hands.

I don't know if there's a lot to worry about with Ayer helming Suicide Squad but after watching this film it kind of makes me a little bit nervous. That worry is off set a little bit by the great names attached to the film, like Jared Leto, Will Smith, etc. Its just a little bit concerning... cause this movie was complete garbage.

It just worries me because I'm already iffy on a lot of the DC franchise being put into the hands of Zack Snyder who has a spotted track record himself and you have someone very similar to him that has made great films... but also made Sabotage.

Not a huge thing, I think I have faith in Ayer that he'll do it right. This movie is just a little concerning, that's all.

I don't wanna waste anymore time on this movie. Sabotage isn't a good film, at all. End of story.

What do you think? Comment and Discuss below! Or you can shoot me a tweet @cmhaugen24 and follow me on Twitter to get updates on movie news and reviews.

I'll leave you with this. I'm going to be reviewing a couple of Schwarzenegger films, again Total Recall is coming, I just wish I could see this one. Enjoy!

Why Spider-man might still fail at Marvel

Spider-man is one of the most iconic superheroes in world of Marvel and just superheroes in general...

Or at least he used to be.

There was a time when Spider-man was the biggest name when it came to Superhero films because in essence, it started what I think Marvel perfected with Iron Man and everything that followed. But back in 2002, all we had were a couple good superhero films and a long list of films that were just bad. Tobey McGuire's Spider-man really created a fun journey for us to go down and it was something totally new that we had never seen before. To see Spider-man swing around was unprecedented. No wonder the films have made less and less money as the franchise went on, got rebooted, and then died again.

But nonetheless, people still saw Spider-man as the household name. One of the best superheroes there were. He's probably the best known of the Marvel universe and he is the best right?

That would have been the case had Iron Man and all the other Marvel movies not come out. Now people are debating on who is the best of the Avengers, Captain America or Iron Man. Never in a million years would we have thought that a Norse God like Thor would have been as popular as he is, nor would we ever expect a property like Guardians of the Galaxy to gross more money in the Box Office than a Spider-man film.

The fact of the matter is, Marvel did their superheroes right and gave them interesting stories and gave us more of a variety than what we had ever expected. And yet Sony continued to hash out the same story over two franchises.

I am in no way saying that Spider-man is no longer popular. I think that he is an you can see that in his box office performance, and the very fact that Marvel fought for such a long time to get Spider-man over the MCU.

What I'm saying is, I think Spider-man still might fail in the MCU.

As I said before, every Spider-man film has had less and less of a box office turnout than the one before it. I'm willing to stake it on the fact that people are just getting sick of the Spider-man story. Especially with more superheroes coming out every year with interesting stories and backgrounds, I have no reason to believe that that trend is going to stop.

Now you may be saying. Connor, all of those movies are with Sony, put the property back in the hands of Marvel and you'll see the property get popular again.

To that I said, it doesn't matter.

Here's my prediction.

Civil War, is going to be great. It still hasn't been confirmed that Spider-man is going to be in it but I'm 90% sure that it is. For the sake of argument, let's say Spider-man is going to appear and be an intricate part of Civil War. Its going to do well. Spider-man is returning to Marvel. Its a Captain America movie, its got Iron Man in it. Its going to be set up really nicely in Age of Ultron, its going to do well.

Having Spider-man in the film is going to help the film, but this movie was going to do well regardless so I am not counting it as a "Spider-man" movie. Its going to be about Captain America with Spider-man and Iron Man tagging along. Or its going to be a Civil War movie with a focus on Captain America and Iron Man's struggle. In short, this movie is not going to focus on Spider-man.

So then what happens?

Sony and Marvel made statements saying that there would be a Spider-man standalone film that would take place in the Marvel Cinematic Universe after Spider-man's first appearance. Its happening in 2017 and is really pushing back all the Marvel movies coming out in in Phase 3.

My prediction is, Spider-man is still going to under perform.

I'm not saying Marvel is going to do a bad job with Spider-man, I'm not saying it won't be a good movie, all I'm saying is, its going to under perform, it is not going to be the movie Sony or Marvel (more Sony) wants it to be.

I'm willing to say that it probably will do better than Amazing Spider-man 2 just because the direction Marvel will go with it will make it better, but the movie will never reach the levels Sony hopes for and that is the levels that it was at prior to 2008 during the Sam Raimi Spider-man films.

The fact of the matter is, Spider-man is no longer the only superhero out there. He's competing against Iron Men, and Gods, and Mutants, and Guardians, and a whole pluthera of superheroes that we haven't even gotten to.

And you may be saying that it could possibly reach those levels now that its under the helm of Marvel and people will get excited about that. The funny thing is, most movie going audiences still don't know that Spider-man is a separate entity and has been in a different studio. They still see the Marvel insignia in front of all the Spider-man films, for all they know, Spider-man's just getting another reboot. Its just a franchise that is so saturated that I doubt this "standalone" film won't be without at least one supporting role from Hawkeye or someone from the Avengers because Sony has milked so much out of Spider-man that he needs a crutch to carry his movie.

And the worst part of it is, Marvel doesn't need to give two shits if Spider-man succeeds or fails. Technically, the character still belongs to Sony. Sony is the one in financial trouble. As much as they want to keep their pride by "allowing Marvel characters to enter the world of Spider-man" they have more riding on this standalone than Marvel does. Marvel has Spider-man in Civil War, they have him for future Avenger team up films. And if this standalone film doesn't pan out for Marvel, they'll shrug and move onto Captain Marvel. Sony on the other hand will suffer.

Am I saying that Spider-man can never be cool again? Of Course I'm not. There's still a lot of potential for Spider-man property to come and make appearances in the future. In fact bringing Spider-man to the Marvel universe is exciting enough for me because it almost guarantees a Sinister Six movie. Maybe not as soon as we thought, but Marvel just bought another threat for the Avengers to go up against. They just bought another world to their world and they could almost make their entire Phase Four about facing all the Spider-man villains. Like I wrote in my rants on Thanos, this opens up a lot more interesting opportunities that weren't available before and ran the risk of hitting the brakes on the Marvel Cinematic Universe once Infinity Wars is over.

And down the road after this standalone film, there will come a time when we look back at the Raimi films and even the Garfield era and we'll wonder why Spider-man hasn't gotten his own standalone film in a while and they'll break out Spider-man to duke it out alone.

But my prediction is, Marvel will have no interest in creating another standalone Spider-man film after this next one. I'm not saying there won't be, but I'm guessing again that the standalone Spider-man film in the MCU is going to underperform. Its a long ways away and there is a very good chance that I am going to be wrong. But unless they do something incredibly revolutionary with this new Marvel Spider-man, which right now, it doesn't sound like they're going to, its going to be the same old tired storyline that we've seen before in two franchises and people are getting sick of. Unless Marvel and Sony whip something together that is going to blow the minds of every people ever, and puts Spider-man as the best of the best once again, (Imagine Captain America: The Winter Soldier x10), its just not going to be the same.

But what do you think? What do you think the future holds for Spider-man in the MCU? Is it a bright future? Or a dark one? I've written a lot on Spider-man and the road he took to becoming apart of the MCU, those thoughts are mostly in this review of ASM 1. Comment and Discuss below! Or shoot me a tweet @cmhaugen24 and follow me on Twitter to get movie reviews and news updates and my thoughts on them in general.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

I saw a video to today that made me want to come back to this post and just get ideas and thoughts if you have any.

In the video, they were talking about Spider-man, how he's going to fit into the MCU, all the same BS I've been writing about a week now. And then someone on the video brought up an interesting idea regarding Miles Morales.

I'm actually surprised at myself for not talking about Miles Morales previously in this post.

For those who do not know, Miles Morales is a different teenager taking up the mantle of Spider-man. He is also black. Everyone is speculating whether or not they're going to do the Peter Parker storyline AGAIN, or change things up and go with Miles Morales.

Personally, I've always just thought they were going to go with Peter Parker. He's the brand name, he's well known, and he IS Spider-man. I'm sure the Morales storyline is good, but if you're bringing Spider-man to the MCU, it has to be Peter Parker.

Now I wouldn't be sad if they brought in Miles Morales. I'm jumping on the bandwagon and saying I want Donald Glover to play Miles Morales is they do it, something that has been called for by the internet for years.

Troy Barnes for Spider-man, all day everyday!

However, I just think its unlikely... unless they do this idea that I heard in this video.

What if they do exactly what I think they're going to do. Cast some young actor to Peter Parker. I'm hearing rumors of Taron Egerton, or Logan Lerman (I personally really don't want Lerman) (I'm still pulling for Shia). But he swings in, joins the Avengers and then come the standalone film, we see Spidey swinging around. He lands on top of the Rockefeller building (or Stark Tower?!?), pulls of his mask and there's Donald Glover. 

Maybe it focuses just on Miles alone and his story. Maybe its Peter and Miles teaming up. TWO SPIDER-MANS!!!!

Is it going to happen? Probably not. In fact, I'm almost 105% percent sure that its not happening. I hate it when people theorize on this shit and say that its going to happen. Its not going to happen... but it would be fun.

Personally though, that could be interesting. That could be something that could save the Spider-man standalone film and actually make it something that won't follow the trends that have been set by the last five franchise films.

I'm probably gonna come back to this post when all is said and done and think this was an incredibly stupid idea, (hell I might do that in 10 minutes) but give me your thoughts on this? Is there any way to save this Spider-man standalone film from being a disaster?

ANOTHER UPDATE - I ended up writing a little bit more into this on another site. A lot of it is repeated but I got into my own theories on how they could do it. Check it out if you like. Here!

High School Musical 2

So... this happened...

High School Musical 2 is the Disney Channel Original movie sequel to the widely popular original High School Musical. The continuation of the students at East Side High and their WACKY adventures being in High school all while dancing and singing.

But this time, its summer vacation and Troy Bolton (played by Zac Efron), Gabriella Montez (played by Vanessa Hudgens) are in a beautiful relationship... where they haven't kissed yet. They're friends Chad (played by Corbin Bleu) Taylor (played by Monique Coleman) and them all want to get a summer job as school gets out. Meanwhile Sharpay (played by Ashley Tisdale) and Ryan (played by Lucas Grabeel)are heading to their country club.

Well for some reason Sharpay really wants to get it in with Troy.

For some reason the ultimate revenger on Troy and Gabriella for stealing their High School Musical is to get with Troy... Does it make a lick of sense? No. Does it make for some I guess interesting conflict for the characters to deal with? well? sorta.

You see Sharpay wants to get get closer to Troy so she wants the country club to hire him, but he's able to get all his friends hired at the country club including Gabriella.

On Sharpay's orders, their employer tries to make Troy's job great and everyone else's really difficult. Troy is getting special treatment, looks at for schools and scholarships, and gets paid more.

Now the biggest problem I had with this movie right off the bat was how surprised these kids were when the boss was going through what they should do for their jobs. You'd think if he was trying to get them to quit, he'd say, you will do all this shit perfectly and he'd make their job overly difficult... but no, he just explains what their jobs will be. In fact its just the jobs they expected to do so I'm not totally sure why these kids are freaking out when the guy is explaining work. Yeah he's particular about when they clock in and when they take breaks but so are a lot of bosses. I'm not sure what its saying to kids watching this if they think that it's such a challenge for them to do... a job...

But that's not going to get the gang down. You know... cause they're all in this together!

 That again is a big thing in this film as the message is we're all a team. And dear god, its like all these teenagers are on uppers because everyone, and I mean EVERYONE is smiling in every single scene.

I don't mean to say they shouldn't smile, it is a Disney movie, but holy shit! There's a scene where these two characters come in mid song and they're so animated and fake that it reminds me of an actual high school musical. Which I guess if that's what they're going for that's fine, but you've got enough animation in the songs, give us some actual dialogue, something people would actually say and make these characters a little bit less one dimensional.

That's another thing, all those characters in the first movie that sang the song about getting away from the Status quo, well in them all growing apart from what is expected of them, they converged back into the same god damn character.

Like remember Kelsi?

Sure she wasn't the most interesting character but she was kind of your quiet composer behind the scenes. But nope, a magical song at the end of the first film drained out any character from that and now I can't tell the difference between her and any other female character in this movie.

Same with the guys. Like I get the message of the first film was that you don't have to conform to the group you're designated to, Stoners... I mean Skaters can play the chello, Nerds can like hip hop, a basket ball player can sing. But at no point did they ever say Troy wasn't a basketball player anymore. He still liked to play Basketball he just liked to sing too.

So why did Kelsi change? And you may say, Well Connor, she in fact did not change, See she has that hipster looking hat. That means she is quirky and different. To that I say, You're wrong. Go home!

So yeah, everyone is a team and they're basically teaming up against Sharpay, at least until the end where Sharpay suddenly realizes that they're all in this together and suddenly has a change of heart... the same way she did in the first film! Now, why they would forgive her being a royal bitch to everyone? I don't know. But its High School Musical. I need to stop asking intelligence questions.

I mean its probably the reason he's the only one with a career now, but Zac Efron is again the center of the film as he gets caught up in all the perks Sharpay and her father is giving him. He of course loses sight of who he is and his friends notice it.

I have to give the guy some credit, he's an okay actor. He's a lot more confident in this film and while he's still Disney animated, I can relate to his character. Could a lot of his problems be fixed by just having a conversation with his friends as opposed to listening to his frat boy dad like he did in the first movie? Well yeah, but hey, Dad's are stupid right?

The worst part about this whole situation is that a lot of it is brought on by Sharpay giving him special treatment. She brings him to light to her father who has connections at a prestigious university (I don't know how prestigious New Mexico University is, but I'll bite for now) and wants to help Troy get on the Basketball team and get scholarships. Troy obviously being nervous about college goes along with the perks and is nice to Sharpay.

The problem I have with it is, at no point does Sharpay's father say, "Listen boy, you had better well fuck my daughter or I will pull all support towards college for you." As far as we know, her father just likes Troy and there's nothing to say he's giving special treatment, a lot of the special treatment he gets comes from him being charming and being good at sports. So to a certain point, I don't quite get a lot of the grief his friends give him. He's getting opportunities, his friends should be happy for him and not get butt hurt when he doesn't join them for lunch. Does Troy become a little bit of a jerk? Yes, but that's really only in convenience with the plot and teach the lesson of not losing yourself... I guess.

The songs of the film are once again your generic Disney crap.

I feel like the first movie's songs are much more iconic and will probably last a little bit longer than the songs in this movie. But that doesn't mean that they're not performed well. Everyone in the cast I guess has a good voice. I don't know how much of it they're actually singing or how much of it is autotuned but if I think too much harder into this film my brain is going to hurt and you all should definitely give me a lot of shit for this review.

Oh another thing that is really funny watching this as a 22 year old college student is seeing all the sexual tension in this cast. I know Zac Efron and Vanessa Hudgens were dating at the time of this movie. I don't know if they had had sex yet but damn it looked like they needed to. Every scene had sexual tension so thick you could cut it with a knife. Which wouldn't be that weird, if the two had ever kissed before. The big deal of this movie was that this was the first time Troy and Gabriella had ever kissed. But damn it looked like they were ready to do so much more. Summer Lovin to the extreme.

And what's more is, it showed in the rest of the cast two. Sharpay just looked like she wanted to get into Troy's pants. Ryan and Sharpay continue to have that weird chemistry even though they're suppose to be brother and sister. Even Ryan and Chad had a moment where I was convinced they were going behind the dugout after the baseball game for some extra innings. I know its a Disney Channel Original movie and everything here is innocent and sweet but I can only imagine that had to be a problem off camera.

Overall, High School Musical 2 is what you expect of a sequel to High School Musical. If you didn't like the first one, I'm not totally sure why you watched the second one. If you're like me and have a girlfriend that is making you see it, well it doesn't really matter what I say, she probably loves it. I'll just be the one to say, its not my type of movie. I'm not gonna rave about High School Musical 2 because I don't like Disney Channel Original movies. But I'm not gonna say the movie was awful. The characters were pretty wooden and Disney generic but if anything its a fun movie to poke holes in and hopefully you only have to watch it once.

There's a very good chance I will have to watch High School Musical 3... I don't know when, but it will happen eventually.

But that's what I thought of High School Musical 2. What did you think? Why do you like the High School Musical movies? Comment and Discuss below! Or shoot me a tweet @cmhaugen24 and follow me on Twitter to get updates on movie news and reviews.

I'll leave you with this. The great thing that came out of this movie was the song Bet on it. Not because the song is good, but the fact Zac Efron does an incredibly obnoxious dance number while singing this song that goes with any song, including The Sound of Music. Enjoy!

Tommy Boy

Can someone explain this poster? Either Tommy has three arms or Richard has one messed up right arm...

Lorne Michaels in many ways is a genius. He creates this idea called Saturday Night Live, a cultural icon that has brought some of the best comedians to the spotlight. As far as his work on the small screen goes, I can't complain about Lorne Michaels at all.

As for his work on the large screen...

I have to cut the guy a little bit of slack, he didn't write a lot of the movies he's been involved with, but he did produce a lot of them. So while I love movies like Hot Rod, think movies like Baby Mama are alright and absolutely hate movies like Wayne's World. I have to say the guy has some interesting choices one what he decides to produce.

All that being said, there are movies he did strike gold on. And Tommy Boy is one of those movies.

Unlike Wayne's World, Tommy Boy is not based off an SNL sketch, its just an original story about an immature man child who is thrown into responsibility after the untimely death of his father.

The comedy is based off of Chris Farley and David Spade's acting ability and their capability to make you laugh by themselves and not solely on the assumption that you saw and laughed at the individual SNL sketch they were in.

Tommy Boy is in essence a Road Trip movie. Tommy Callaghan (played by Chris Farley) is the heir to a large auto factory, that makes brake pads, on his way back from college in which he spent 7 years getting undergraduate. His father (played by Brian Dennehy) is the best in the business and he intends for his son to take up his mantle when he dies. But that's not gonna happen for a while right?

When Tommy returns home, his father surprises him with the fact that he is getting remarried and Tommy is going to have a new mother (played by Bo Derek) and a new brother (played by Rob Lowe). Unfortunately, his father suddenly has a heart attack, dies, and the factory is in financial trouble. But Tommy volunteers to go on a sales road trip with his father's right hand man, Richard (played by David Spade) in order to sell enough brake pads to pay the bank and save the factory, and the town that depends on it for employment.

Like I said before, the movie's comedy lies in the performances of Chris Farley and David Spade. And they are just down right hilarious. They play them off as these two opposites, Tommy being an immature manchild, and Richard being his professional workaholic, but in their travels together, they have a lot more in common then they think.

I watched this movie when I was sick and I was still laughing my ass off (painfully) at the part where they hit a deer. They both just stand there looking at it and end up bursting into tears. Or when they hear a sappy power ballad on the radio and they both think the other one will think its lame but a scene later they're both singing passionately to it. And those aren't even the funniest parts of the movie!

Unlike Wayne's World, where a lot of the humor is suppose to comes from the fact that they talk like morons and they make reference to a lot of things that were "funny" in the 80s and 90s, Tommy Boy relies on Chris Farley just as a comedic gem.

Its probably been said a billion times before but I truly think the world was robbed at the time of Chris Farley's untimely death. The guy just knew all about comedic timing, he knew how to make people laugh, but at the same time, this movie proves that he's able to be a lovable buffoon.

While I won't say Tommy Boy has the best acting in the world (lets be honest, no comedy ever does) the movie does a good job at making Tommy a good guy with a good heart, regardless of how smart he is and no matter how many times he screws up.

The fact of the matter is you care whether or not he succeeds or fails and that's the whole point right? To be invested in the actions of the protagonist and those he works with? As comedic as this movie is, it does touch on some good themes and the relationship between him and David Spade is really well done as Richard feels closer to Tommy's father since they worked together but feels discarded when Tommy comes back.

Your villains of course, are Rob Lowe (I swear, was he just villain of the year back in the 90s?) and Bo Derek.

The two don't contribute a whole lot to the movie besides being the antagonists of the film and one kind of funny scene where Rob Lowe gets attacked by a guard dog. But honestly, this movie didn't necessarily need to have a "bad guy". This movie could have just been about Tommy and Richard road tripping it, and with the exception of the con that Rob Lowe and Bo Derek are trying to pull on the Callaghan factory, that is basically the movie.

But I think the movie is done well enough that I really liked them in the movie and didn't feel they were useless. They served their purpose and moved out of the way for the real comedy in the film.

Of course, as I've said in all my comedy reviews, Comedy is subjective. I think this movie was piss my pants hilarious, you may think its childish and dumb. That's really up to you.

I went into this a little bit in my review of Wayne's World but the fact of the matter is, Chris Farley's style of comedy is just timeless because Farley has the ability to do physical comedy that is funny whether its the 90s, or 2015. I showed this clip in the Wayne's World review so I won't give it a video again, but its just one of the best scenes of the movie and it shows Farley's talent.

I won't belabour this review any longer. In short, I love this film. Yeah it has problems, like why does the girl fall in love with the baffoon the same way that other chick did in Wayne's World... but for some reason I don't care as much in this film. The fact of the matter is, ten years down the road, people should be talking about this movie, and not Wayne's World. Was that the whole point of this review? Maybe?

What do you think of Tommy Boy? What is your favorite comedy from the 90s? Comment and Discuss Below! Also you can shoot me a tweet @cmhaugen24 on Twitter and follow me to get updates on movie news and reviews.

I'll leave you with this. I wish I could get you a version of the skit Farley is probably best known for "Van Down by the River" but because NBC is really picky about copyrights, I leave you with him doing that bit on Conan back in the 90s. Its almost like Conan never aged. Enjoy!

Special Forces

Special Forces is a movie you probably haven't heard of and honestly, its not a movie you'll probably hear of again. Its one of those obscure films on Netflix that was probably a direct to video release, or its a foreign film... or both. I think Special Forces was a French film, that's probably why I never saw it.

Special Forces is a French film about a journalist, Elsa Casanova (played by Diane Kruger) who is kidnapped in Afghanistan while she is doing investigative work on the Taliban. Her captor, your stereotypical radical muslim terrorist for the evening (played by Raz Degan) is, again, your stereotypical evil terrorist bad guy with no discernible character traits besides being muslim, being Arab and being a terrorist.

The French Government decides that they're not going to let her be killed by the Taliban so they send their elite special forces unit to rescue her.

Sounds pretty straight forward right? THEN WHY DID THIS MOVIE RUN ALMOST 2 HOURS!?!?!?

Seriously, all they had to do was go get the girl and go home. But then they're radio is destroyed, so they decide that they need to cross the border back in Afghanistan, because I guess they were in Pakistan, in order for them to be rescued.

First off, the military trains for contingencies like this. They know that technology is bound to fail, its bound to get destroyed, that's why they wouldn't just leave them...

But that's what happens.

Anyway, they really rescue her in the first 40 minutes of the film and the rest is this hike across the border and back to safety.

This team is headed up by Djimon Hounsou and Denis Menochet and some other guys but honestly, this movie goes so quickly, is so focused on the action, and gives little to know time to explain characters, that you never really get to know who is who. In short, there's the Djimon Hounsou, the only famous actor, That actor you might get confused with someone else in Denis Menochet, the sniper guy, the other large guy, the guy Diane Kruger falls in love with and the guy who dies first.

I mean I can't really say the movie is absolute garbage. Hounsou and Kruger are good actors and they do well with what they have. The problem is that the script is so barebones and the movie is trying a little bit too hard to show this gritty and violent warzone and sacrifices every bit of character development for gun battles that are in essence really stupid.

I'm not a huge connoisseur of French film so I don't know if this is considered good in Europe. But from what I know of film, this movie is not a very well done film.

I will give the movie credit, while the tactics aren't exactly world class or realistic, this movie is a fun movie if all you're looking for is a lot of shooting and people dying left and right. This movie is over the top, with all the slow motion death scenes you could ever want and all the blood and violence you'll ever need.

The best example of just how little this movie cares about character development is in the villain.

Like I said before, the main antagonist is as stereotypical of a radical muslim terrorist as you're ever going to get. But while every other muslim terrorist in every other movie was a little bit intelligent, this guy is just down right stupid.

They start him off as this cool and calculating villain but when the Special forces team rescue Elsa, this guy just does not let them go. He insists they follow them on foot, and if anybody disagrees with him, don't worry he'll shoot them in the face for no apparent reason. Which I could stand for if there wasn't the part where they go to a village where the protagonists were staying and before the village elder can even say whether or not they were there, he shoots him straight in the face, THEN asks where the reporter is. Oh I'm sure they're going to tell you now.

Overall, he's just dumb.

Frankly, this movie is just a video game that I didn't get to play. Its one long cut scene from a Call of Duty video game that before I could actually pick up the controller, the credits started rolling. I think there's a lot in the style this film is made in that makes it a "French" film, strange cuts of scenes, random passages of time, but it doesn't do anything for me and it doesn't make the movie anything more than it actually is, a war film where its just a betting game about who is going to make it to the end, and who isn't.

The good things about the film? The action (as cheesy as it was) some moments with Diane Kruger or Djimon Hounsou, and when the movie ended. The bad things about this movie? The fast tracked story and character development. The characters who weren't characters as much as they were fingers to pull triggers. And finally, the horrible villain and the fact that this movie, after all the action was done, was boring as shit.

But those are my thoughts on Special Forces. What do you think? Have you ever found a really obscure movie on Netflix, watched it and been surprised on how good it was? Let me know by Commenting and Discussing below! Also you can shoot me a tweet @cmhaugen24 and you can follow me on Twitter to get updates on movie reviews and news.

I'll leave you with this. Well this movie is kind of a downer, here's something funny. The one good sketch to come out of Mad TV. Stuart! Enjoy!

The Amazing Spider-man / Spider-man coming to Marvel!

Ladies and Gentleman! Its happening! Your friendly neighborhood Spider-man is coming home... sort of...

I awoke to the news that Spider-man will appear in an upcoming film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe along side Thor, Iron Man, Captain America, all your favorite Avengers. I am overly stoked for this news as I have written a couple of posts on Spider-man, from all the reviews of the Sam Raimi films.

Spider-man 1
Spider-man 2
Spider-man 3

To the overly criticized (I think a little bit unfairly) sequel to the reboot.

The Amazing Spider-man 2

To my thoughts on the hack at Sony and where Marvel should be heading in the future, especially if Spider-man joins the Avengers.

Sony Hacks
Future of Marvel Universe.

So as you can tell, I've written a lot about Spider-man and its all culminating to this day when the web slinger finally makes his debut in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and I cannot be more stoked.

In honor of this triumphant day, I watched The Amazing Spider-man to give a good idea of where this franchise came from, where it went to with its sequel and whether or not its a good film or not. What I plan to do is write the review for this film. Then at the end (or in another post, depending how long the second part is) I'll be talking about this new deal, what the perimeters are between Sony and Marvel, and what the future holds for both companies and franchises.

I was always a huge fan of the Sam Raimi Spider-man films. To me, they are very much the Godfathers of modern Superhero films. Sure they weren't the best movies in the world, and I'll talk more about that later in the review, but Tobey Mcguire's Spider-man had a special place in my heart.

So when this Andrew Garfield came around pretending to be Peter Parker, I was not having any of it. I didn't see the movie in theaters, and I just kind of sat back with my Sam Raimi films and just wished they would come back. Also, when they announced they were rebooting it, it just felt strange. It had been about 5 years since Spider-man 3, and it seemed a little bit early for ANOTHER origin story, a story we all know very, very well. It took me a long time to finally sit down and watch the film. Honestly, I only saw it once, enjoyed it and made tentative peace with the franchise as the trailer for the second one came out and it looked enjoyable enough.

You know the story, Peter Parker (played by Andrew Garfield) is your run of the mill brilliant social outcast who lives with his Aunt May (played by Sally Field) and Uncle Ben (played by Martin Sheen). What's a little bit different this time around is that instead of Peter Parker being a complete nerd the way Tobey Mcguire played it, he's more of a good looking, suave, skateboarding, kinda hipster outcast. Okay, that's... a little weird. The way I always knew Peter Parker was as the nerd and his alter ego was the arrogant obnoxious side of him...

I'll get back to that in a second. At the beginning, we see that Peter's parents abandoned him with his aunt and uncle when he was very little and he wants to figure out what happened to them. He finds a briefcase belonging to his father that leads him to Oscorp and a brilliant geneticist named Kurt Connors. (Played by Rhys Ifans). While on a tour, led by his crush, a smart, cute girl named Gwen Stacey (played by Emma Stone), Parker finds himself in a room with genetically enhanced spiders. He gets bitten by one and obtains the power of spiders, including super strength, enhanced senses, and all the powers you'd expect from Spider-man.

The interesting part is, the first third of the movie doesn't feel like a superhero film at all. In many ways, it feels like a really interesting espionage, action thriller. Peter doesn't dawn the suit till close to half way and everything leading up to that is actually a lot of fun. In a way, I kind of forget this is the Spider-man origin story and am just interested in the cinematic experience and storytelling the movie is putting me through. Like change the guys name, pretend he doesn't turn into Spider-man, this could actually be a really interesting story with science, espionage, and super powers but not in the classic superhero fashion we're used to. The first half of this movie, was exceptional storytelling.

As he's experiencing these changes, there's a pretty good relationship between him and his Uncle Ben. Martin Sheen really does well with what they give him. Unfortunately, as we all know, Uncle Ben's fate is that of tragedy and he dies before there's really a lot of development between the two. I think I like Martin Sheen a little bit more than Cliff Robertson (Uncle Ben from the Sam Raimi films) but that's only because this movie takes a little bit more time before killing him off. Uncle Ben's death is the catalyst to Spider-man's existence so in the Sam Raimi film they wanted to get that off the ground fast as opposed to this film where they wanted to develop the investigation into Oscorp and the work Peter's father did before he died.

And that's the other thing, this movie sets it up as Peter going after the guy who murdered Uncle Ben and never really finding him but going into vigilante work kind of by accident. Its done very well and its an eventual progression that really shows Peter as a character rather than just the alter ego of Spider-man.

But damn, when Parker is Spider-man, this is where the movie does a little bit better of a job than the Sam Raimi films. Garfield's Spider-man is more arrogant, more obnoxious, and just a truer version of the superhero. I still love McGuire's Spider-man, but he was never really the arrogant and smooth the way Garfield is. However, he plays Peter Parker the way, I personally think, he should be played. Garfield is more of a punk emo outcast that I'm not totally sure why people pick on him, where McGuire was legitimately a nerd. I understand him being bullied, I don't understand Garfield getting bullied.

But where this movie really shines, is in the love interest.

Gwen Stacy is smart. Mary Jane was not. Gwen Stacy is funny. Mary Jane was not. Gwen Stacy contributed to the plot and helped Spider-man where she could. Mary Jane was the thing Spider-man had to save. Emma Stone is an incredible actor. Kirsten Dunst is... well... not as Mary Jane.

I think it only gets better in Spider-man 2, but Gwen Stacy and Peter Parker are just adorable in the Amazing Spider-man films.

In the first half, Peter is just getting to know Gwen, she cares for him more and more as the movie goes on and their relationship is actually really fun.

It only gets better when they don't try and play the whole, "I'm hiding my identity from you" Peter flat out reveals that he is Spider-man, pretty much on their first date. Which becomes even more interesting when we figure out that Gwen's father (played by Dennis Leary) is a Captain for the NYPD and is on the hunt for the vigilante Spider-man.

This is all just the relationships and build up of family and friends Peter has behind him. I haven't even begun talking about the main villain or the main conflict of the movie. That's how well developed this film is.

The main conflict comes when Peter starts working with Curt Connors with the formula developed by his father to help Dr. Connors achieve strides in his genetic research. Connors wants to develop a serum that would regrow limbs and help the sick and Peter helps him with that. And this is before he even becomes Spider-man. Again, even before Peter puts the suit on, this film ropes you in from the beginning.

Its when Connors is forced to pursue human trials for the serum that things go awry and the Spider-man villain, The Lizard is born.

What's fun about the Lizard is the sort of Mr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde complex they go for in this situation.

It does breach on the same villain plot line that has been the case in every Spider-man villain in all time, where a science experiment goes wrong and suddenly he develops split personality, cause you know, villains are never developed they just kind of happen. But in a twisted way, Kurt Connors believes what he is doing is right. I guess that's kind of interesting and makes him a little bit of an interesting character.

The problem with The Lizard is that he's just not that memorable. When I think of all the great villains that have come out of the Spider-man movies, The Lizard is probably the last one I think of just because Kurt Connors isn't that interesting. I think Ifans does a good job and its serviceable to the film as a whole. But the concept is just a little bit strange and while fighting a giant lizard is kind of fun to watch, he's just not the villain that sticks with you at the end of the day. Say what you will about how cooky Willem Defoe played The Green Goblin, you will never forget that villain every time you think of the Spider-man films.

The Heart Osborne! First you attack his heart!

And that's why I have to say, the last third of the movie isn't exactly as fun as the first two. Its your typical race against time while Spider-man fights the villain while stopping his evil plot. Like the villain, its serviceable to the plot and the film as a whole, but overall, I just don't love the ending. Its good, but not great.

Which makes me say something that you might disagree with at first, but hear me out. The Amazing Spider-man, is not a very good superhero film, its just a better action thriller film. Honestly, I was more interested seeing this brilliant kid use his detective skills to uncover the secrets in this science lab. Yeah he got super powers but take out the whole Spider-man storyline, and you've got yourself a really interesting sci fi mystery action thriller. 

And that's why I think we're in a golden age of superhero films because its no longer enough to just give us a standard superhero origin story anymore. If that were the case, Green Lantern would have been much more popular. Its when directors and writers take the superhero genre and meld it with other genres. That is why Captain America: The Winter Soldier is probably the best superhero film out there today, because it didn't just feel like the same old superhero film we've seen countless times before, it had that espionage thriller edge to it that made it really good. 

So while I personally prefer the Sam Raimi Spider-man films over The Amazing Spider-man films, its only because I see those movies as better Spider-man films. I recognize that The Amazing Spider-man is, in essence, a better film. 

That may be a little bit confusing, but the fact of the matter is, the acting is good, the action is spectacular, the characters are a lot of fun and well developed. The visuals are beautiful. The story is intriguing and is just a good all around story. Raimi may have created a better story for Spider-man in particular in the campy fashion that he did, but The Amazing Spider-man is just done better and is an all around better film. 

Overall, I really like The Amazing Spider-man. Its not a ground breaking movie, but its a good film, plain and simple. 

So its 2012, I'm Sony and my Spider-man reboot has been a commerical and critical success. What happens now? There's obviously going to be a sequel, but in a world where The Avengers just broke world records and cinematic universes are all the rage, where does the Spider-man franchise go?

Unfortunately, this is a horrible trap Sony fell right into. Sony holds the movie rights to Spider-man and all his villains and allies that showed up in the comics, but honestly, there's only so much you can do with that. There's no possibility of any team up or assembly movies like the huge success of The Avengers. What is the plan? Well at the end of this film there's a little bit of a teaser to the future. Kurt Connors is visited by a mysterious stranger with a fedora who hints at further mystery in the Spider-man universe, a promise of more answers in future films... and could this have possibly been a sort of evil Nick Fury team up proposition perhaps?

The answer in short is yes. 

This mysterious man or, "The Gentleman" is the oncoming storm that was suppose to be building up to an Avengers style team up film for a bunch of villains called The Sinister 6. 

Further hinted at in The Amazing Spider-man 2, a villain team up movie was something that hadn't really been thought of before. I was excited about it, I think a lot of people were excited about it. And what better way to set up this movie by knocking it out of the park and teasing it in The Amazing Spider-man 2. 

Well, I think that's the biggest tragedy that came with ASM 2. The movie had so much riding on it and was suppose to be the launching pad for Sony to have its own Cinematic Universe. 

But I have to ask, how?

Yeah sure, I get it, you wanna do a team up movie with villains, that's kind of cool, there are some interesting villains in the Spider-man universe. But what then? Well another Spider-man movie of course... Okay, but what then? ... Maybe an all female superhero team? With who? I don't know, Spider-woman... Black Cat... other... people... Okay, I'll bite, what then? ... An Aunt May movie?

Like what the hell were they thinking with this. Now none of the films that I mentioned were ever confirmed, nor was a Venom movie or anything like that. All of these films were theorized on, but a lot of it rode on this sequel being the best thing since sliced bread, especially since these films were announced before The Amazing Spider-man 2 came out. A sequel that came out sandwiched in between some of the best superhero films to date. Captain America: The Winter Soldier, X-Men: Days of Future Past, AND Guardians of the Galaxy, a film about a talking raccoon and a tree...

And to add insult to injury, while Sony was already scrambling after the poor turn out of The Amazing Spider-man 2, this was all made public by the hacking that took place. Suddenly all panic and scrambling that was at once happening behind closed doors, was made public and public outcry did the rest. 

That brings us to today. 

Not a lot has been said about how exactly the deal is going down, but the way I understand it is, Sony and Marvel are collaborating in order to get Spider-man to appear in upcoming Marvel properties. Sony will maintain distribution rights, have final creative say, and still own the character, but Spider-man will appear in a Marvel film in the next few years. If you look at my Spider-man in Civil War rant, you'll know, Spider-man appearing in Civil War is my pick, and I'm pretty sure that will be the case. 

This news surprised me. For years, the question has been, will Sony just sell Spider-man back to Marvel or will they work out some deal to have him in there while Sony maintains licensing. The answer I thought it was always going to be was that Sony would just cut their loses and sell the rights back, or work something out where Marvel gets creative control and technically owns it but Sony will maintain distribution. But no, this is a collaboration. Spider-man still belongs to Sony, it just sounds like they're lending him to Marvel, which is bold wording for Sony. 

Again, not a whole lot has been said beyond the fact that Spider-man will appear in an upcoming Marvel film, and that Spider-man will have his own standalone film that takes place in the Marvel Cinematic universe. The film will premiere on the date Thor: Ragnarok was suppose to premiere and the entire schedule will push back with the exception of The Infinity Wars films. 

Frankly, the legal measures of the deal don't matter, its more the fact that this is the day Comic book fans have been waiting for for years and it has finally come. 

Another part of the deal that is unspecified is whether or not this Spider-man is a third reboot, giving us a new MCU Spider-man, OR if this is a continuation of The Amazing Spider-man films and the universes are just colliding. 

In other words... what happens to Garfield? Will he continue to play Spider-man or will they recast the part again. 

Personally, I don't think Garfield will suffer incredibly if he is not included in this new future of Spider-man. He's a talented actor, he's bound to get work, I'm not worried about that. 

But after watching the first film, I kind of don't want them to recast again. Garfield is a really good Spider-man. Yeah, I'm not wild about his Peter Parker, but I could see him web slinging with the Avengers and it would eliminate any need of Marvel to restart his origin. There are a lot of plus sides to having the worlds just collide.

However, I get the feeling that part of this deal is that Garfield is out and they reboot, once again. From what I know about past talks and what I guess could be the vision for Spider-man in the MCU is that Marvel wants creative freedom to go where they want with Spider-man and not be bogged down by what has been created by Sony. 

The fact of the matter is, where were The Avengers when Electro went nuts in Time Square? Where was Spider-man when aliens invaded New York? Where is Stark Tower? Unless they want to waste time explaining all the inconsistencies, its probably best for Spider-man to have new origins and a new face in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Its sad, but true. I mentioned this in my Spider-man in Civil War Rant, but my idea is that Spider-man's origin should be tweaked a little bit where Spider-man is inspired by the Avengers to dawn the Spidey-suit. 

In my Civil War rant, I laid out my ideal situation, here's what it is. 

"Spider-man is doing his thing in New York. But Spider-man is doing his local stuff in New York, he's small time compared to the Avengers. You could even say that Peter Parker was inspired by the events of the Avengers 1 to do his vigilante stuff in New York. At the end of Age of Ultron, the inklings of the Civil War are already startin. The post credit scene could be Tony Stark looking over the new government legislation that is the subject of conflict in Civil War. He then starts talking about the PR campaign and he pulls out a folder. Says, I think I know the perfect poster boy for this new legislation. At the end of the scene, the camera pans over to the file Stark is looking at and you see a picture of a nerdy young adult in New York and at the Bottom of the page the file says, Peter Parker."

Maybe its too late to get that End Credit Scene in Age of Ultron but something like that would make a lot of sense to me. Spider-man getting recruited to serve as poster boy for this Civil War and getting caught in the middle of Captain America and Iron Man's feud is the best thing that could ever happen to the MCU and a perfect way to introduce Spider-man without giving him another origin story which we were sick of when The Amazing Spider-man 1 came out. 

I'm getting sweaty just thinking about how awesome this could end up being... if its done right. Kenny!

Honestly, I'm so excited that I don't really care who plays Spider-man or which direction they go with this. If its possible, I'd like to see Andrew Garfield return and just see a collision of worlds, but if they end up casting a new Spider-man I won't be too bummed. 

So who should play Spider-man?

If they do recast him, they'll have to get someone young in order to get him in a deal that spans multiple films. Its just how these things work. The thing is, I don't know the younger generation of actors that well outside of those few people I've seen in young adult films like Hunger Games and Divergent. And no I do not want any of those people playing Peter Parker. I will not stand for a Peeta Parker or... some reference to Divergent. 

No my pick for Spider-man is a little bit strange and it might garner some hate, but hear me out. 

I want Shia Labeouf to be the next Peter Parker. 

You may be saying, "What? That plagarizing, paper bag wearing douche?" 

Yes I understand 2014 was not a good year for Shia. I don't know what happened with this guy but if he was going for an image change, it happened. No longer did people see Shia as the loveable kid from the Disney channel, that quirky kid from Transformers. Shia is not kind of a bummer with all the depressing news about him and his darker tone in movies. 

However, I think that the guy can act. Put aside all the BS about the paper bag and all his personal drama, I think the guy is a talented actor and given the right script, I think we can put a smile back on Shia's face. God knows how long its been since there was one there. 

The fact of the matter is, the guy is the age that Garfield started his tenure as the web slinger. Shave off the beard, and give him the opportunity to be a little bit more of a fun character and give him the opportunity to be apart of a franchise that isn't a total bomb like Transformers, I know the guy is better than that. 

I think being in a superhero franchise might be the best thing for Shia to make him more likable to a larger audience, give him a little bit of padding so he can go off and do his indie stuff later, and just give the guy a god damn smile these days. 

I don't know, maybe I'm wrong, but look at this picture tell me this isn't an interesting idea at the very least. 

Beard be gone!

Again, this is my dream cast so I know its probably not going to happen. But this is where I'm interested in your thoughts. Who do you think should play Spider-man in the new MCU Spider-man movies?

Along with that, what are your feelings on Spidey joining the MCU at all?

And finally, what do you think of the Amazing Spider-man. 1 or 2, did you think they were good? Did Sony ever have a chance with that franchise or was it dead on arrival? Comment and Discuss below! Also shoot me a tweet @cmhaugen24 on Twitter and follow me to get more movie news and movie reviews. 

I'll leave you with this. This was a long rant... so I'm going to just do the easy route and just give you the Honest Trailer for The Amazing Spider-man. Enjoy!

High School Musical

To be clear... I wanted to watch The Muppets. I fought long and hard for the Muppets... instead, we get this movie.

Now, you may be saying, Connor, this movie was a Disney Channel Original film, obviously it shouldn't be held to the same standard as most film because it was on TV. To that I give a distinct and clear no. This movie was built up as the biggest thing since sliced bread. It was hailed by thousands, I would almost say millions as the greatest thing every to come out of the Disney Channel. And while it is listed as a TV movie, I know for a fact that upon the release of the later films, this movie was premiered in theaters... so I will judge this movie the same way I just every other film.

And by god, was this movie a smash hit when it came out. I don't know if a generation just saw this movie and said, "THIS MOVIE SPEAKS TO ME!" or if everybody just thought it was bad that it became a phenomena but everyone just secretly loved it.

I watched this with my girlfriend and my sister. They both could sing every lyric of every song, do every dance move.

So what is it about High School Musical that is so contagious that it still continues to be that movie that everybody either absolutely loves or absolutely hates?

Troy Bolton (played by Zac Efron) and Gabriella Montez (played by Vanessa Hudgens) are both on vacation at a ski resort when they are forced to sing karaoke together, but they actually have a lot of fun and it turns out they can both sing. The two barely get each other's phone numbers before they leave thinking they'll never see each other again and all they have are the memories of that vacation they had together... until Gabriella moves to a new school where Troy just happens to go to.

Trouble abrews when its revealed that Troy is the Captain of the Basketball team and one of the most popular kids in school. Gabriella on the other hand finds her niche with the science team and in this exaggerated high school, all the different clicks don't associate with each other and these two are torn apart, only to have the potential to be brought together through their love for singing, and an audition for a spring musical.

So its the nice girl falling for the popular guy in a musical set in high school... why does this sound familiar?

Of Course! Its Grease!

While the movie doesn't include a song about girls getting pregnant, changing their personality to get the guy, High School Musical is basically a Disneyfied Grease. Except this time, the moral is don't get bogged down by clicks and what is expected of you.

That's a good moral I guess, I can see why the message is empowering. 

So why don't people like this film.

Well... its so full of Disney cheese and whimsy that its just kind of obnoxious. 

Don't get me wrong, I love me my Disney cheesyness, but High School Musical I don't think was

totally marketed towards me. I'm not the demographic they're going for.

The story is littered with obnoxious characters dead set on sticking to the status quo and keeping to the idea that you need to be in a click to feel apart of something. I haven't been to high school for almost five years now, but I don't remember my high school being this segregated.

I did musicals and hung out with people who were considered "the skaters" or were involved with sports, or were really intelligent. In fact I sometimes couldn't stand people in my "click" if that's what you wanna call it and wanted to get away from them. Now, I'm sure Disney was just exaggerating it to make a point, but I'm wondering if that point is kind of dated now and is only just that, an exaggeration. School doesn't function in these little bubbles that High School Musical creates.

But again, we're talking Disney Channel Original Movie... as much as I want to keep this movie to high standards, I just can't sometimes. Its cheesy, its over the top, and at some points... it actually is kind of fun.

The characters are animated to an almost annoying level, but at least they're characters. There's a brother and sister duo (played by Ashley Tisdale and Luke Grabeel) who are so obsessed with theater that they're kind of the antagonists? of the film.

But again, they're so animated, its kind of a spectacle to watch. I'm not saying I'm a die hard High School Musical fan, but I understand the phenomena and if you're into that cheesiness and animation, then HSM is just for you. 

As far as music goes, the songs are a weird combination of bland and generic to kind of fun. They're not gonna blow you away... at least they shouldn't (but the soundtrack was #1 in 2006... so...). 

The funny thing is, I watch this movie the same day I watched Rock of Ages. The truth of Rock of Ages was that the story was pulled out of the songs instead of the way it should be in that the songs should be pulled out of the story. 

So you might be wondering, which was more entertaining, and which one is the better musical? Well,

its a difficult question. If you put two musicals in front of me, one being a peppy over the top Disney Original Channel musical and the other being a musical that utilizes my favorite genre of music with iconic music from iconic rock artists from the 80s, I would have said Rock of Ages in a heartbeat.

But looking at them as movies and as musicals objectively, it becomes a little bit more difficult.

As I said in my Rock of Ages review, while the performances of Rock of Ages was a little bit too poppy for great rock classics, it was still entertaining and I still am going back and listening to some of the renditions of these songs (emphasis on some). The music for Rock of Ages, though cut poorly and had too much influence on the story, is actually really good.

High School Musical on the other hand has a lot of upbeat music and they're original songs. However, as far as memorability goes, that all depends on how much you are involved in the phenomena, but I would hope that nobody would put "Breaking Free" as their all time number one most favorite song in the history of ever, while a lot of people love songs like "Wanted Dead or Alive", "I Wanna Rock" and "Pour Some Sugar on Me". So as far as music goes, Rock of Ages wins it.

But as far as comprehensive films goes, its odd that I'm saying this, but High School Musical wins by a long shot. Yes, its not the greatest story ever, yes its not going to appeal outside of the fan club for the film, but HSM has a comprehensive story. The music is the vehicle but the story is being the wheel, whereas in Rock of Ages, the music is the vehicle and its driving the story, the story is in the backseat being the timid passenger who can't get a word in to the absurd driving in attempt to make a story out of "Don't Stop Believin".

So is High School Musical a good film? Well... objectively speaking, yes. While animated and

obnoxious, it has a plot, the characters have conflict, and the music serves it in probably the best way music can in a musical. Subjectively, its all up to your preference. You're probably either going to absolutely love High School Musical or want to put the Muppet on instead... or the news... or anything other than High School Musical.

Listen, I didn't knowingly give this movie any money because it wasn't my cup of tea. But this is a world where money and fan clubs talk. People, loved this movie and I can stand here and say till I'm blue in the face that High School Musical is a horrible movie... but at the end of the day, is it really hurting anybody? Well besides the acting careers of everyone except Zac Efron, no its not. Its teaching kids to do what they want and not let peer pressure influence them to stifle what they want to do. That's a good message. Can you get that message in a medium that's a little less annoying, probably but, if you're into Disney Channel Original Movies, like cheesy Disney musicals, or are being forced to watch it with your parents, sister, and girlfriend who know every song and dance move, you don't need to be overly embarassed watching High School Musical. Personally, its not my cup of tea, but I can't say its a piece of shit either.

I can't believe I actually wrote something kind of endorsing this movie. Hopefully I gave you all a fair and honest look at High School Musical. Tell me why you love or hate this movie? Comment and Discuss below! Also shoot me a tweet @cmhaugen24 on Twitter and Follow me to get updates on new movie reviews and movie news.

I'll leave you with this. There are a lot of really funny parodies of HSM. If you can find it, find the SNL sketch where Troy Bolton comes back to his high school after his first year at college, it actually kind of made me think that there's hope for Zac Efron could make a career outside of this Disney demon from hell. (I haven't seen any movies with Efron besides The Lucky One) I kind of want him to be a really funny actor, we'll see. Anyway, here's a mildly inappropriate parody of High School Musical done but Mad TV. Enjoy!