The Lobster

In a time where it feels like we only see reboots, remakes, sequels, and prequels, we have to remember that there are original films out there. These films don’t stem from another IP like a previous film, book, or video game. These films are just original. These films are mostly independent films that probably don’t have the budget of the big blockbusters but sometimes they don’t need to be spectacles. These films are just breaths of fresh air that remind you that there is original content out there, you just need to find it. Now… the tradeoff is that you get really weird films like The Lobster.

The Lobster takes place in a science fiction world where people who are single have a finite number of days to be single. If they do not find a partner, they are turned into an animal of their choice. Now when I first heard this concept, I thought it was through some kind of magic, but instead it’s all a part of a society that has some very strange rules. I wish I could tell you what this society totally consists of but it is a little bit confusing what the rules are. However, I feel like the ambiguity of the rules is kind of intentional and it creates for a creepy atmosphere that you feel a uncomfortable in. The first

half of the movie takes place in a hotel where people are divided between being couples and being single. But they eventually go to a city where the police detain people if they are not with their respective partner. And the people that refuse to be in a couple exile themselves to the woods where they are hunted by the people looking for partners. The best analogy I can think of is if the entire world was a real life dating reality show set in the Hunger Games universe.

The story focuses on David (played by Colin Farrell) and the funny thing is, he’s actually the only one with a real name. Everyone else is just described by their features and what is specific about them. Ben Whishaw is in this movie and he’s only known as the Limping Man. Rachel Weisz is only known as the Short sighted woman. And it really points out the themes of this movie. It has really interesting commentary on loneliness, relationships, finding love, and being alone. It is quite the hyperbole of these things so you might have a couple of moments where you’re very confused on why things don’t work out for David or why he’s doing the things that he is doing. Again, the rules of this society aren’t one hundred percent explained so it can be a little bit confusing but it does serve a purpose for the themes in this movie.

The thing that I liked about this movie is that while it had very knock it over your head themes that they really wanted to get across one way or another, it was still a little bit of a science fiction journey for the character of David and you actually get pretty invested in his story. His very weird story.

Now you might be put off by a couple things in this movie. I’ve talked to a couple people and they said that the movie got too weird and was a little too slow to keep watching. And when you finish the movie, you will not be able to deny the elements of this movie that are pretty damn weird. The hotel that they are staying at seems so proper and innocent that when incredibly graphic violence happens or just weird shit happens. On top of all of that, it is a very British film. It has a lot of humor that is very dry and almost cruel but at the same time it made me laugh a lot. The movie rides a fine line between comedic moments and really dark moments. In my opinion, its done really well. As much as I was kind of appalled on how weird this movie was, the tones and themes of this movie along with it just being quirky and original really made this movie a pleasure to watch.

This is an interesting movie for anybody to watch but it really does point out the intricacies of dating and finding a partner in a hyperbolized way but at the same time it’s very relevant. This movie does for single people what Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind did for people going through a break up. It is going to have a lot of moments that will speak to someone who is single and trying to find someone to fall in love with.

The truth is, The Lobster is not for everyone. Like I said it has some really weird moments with some really graphic and kind of depressing imagery. It also has a very British feel to it which I don’t think will speak to a lot of people. However, it is a very original idea and worth at least checking out to see if you like it. You might come out of the movie with a weird feeling in your stomach but at the same time it is something I don’t think you’ve ever really experienced.

But what did you think of the Lobster? I know it’s a weird one, but did that make the movie going experience worse or better? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I'll leave you with this. This is Colin Farrell explaining the plot probably better than I can and explaining the weight change he had to go through while filming this film. Enjoy!

Star Trek Beyond

I honestly can’t tell you why I didn’t go and see Star Trek Beyond in theaters. I really enjoyed the other two Star Trek films, despite what is said about the second one. I’m also not a huge Star Trek fan but the new movies have a feel about them that I really like. I enjoyed Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto and the entire group as the crew of the Star Trek Enterprise.

I think Star Trek Beyond just fell at a time where people weren’t really calling for it. JJ Abrams left the project to do Star Wars, there were so many weird stories about the making of the film, and of course there was the first trailer that really wasn’t that good. Everybody saw that and assumed that Star Trek would go the same route as a lot of third movies in franchises go and just decline in quality.

I finally got around to watching it and I have to say, this was a really fun movie.

Star Trek Beyond takes place 3 years into the Enterprise’s 5 year journey through space to find new worlds and be ambassadors to the Federation. Kirk even mentions that things have gotten pretty episodic in space, a cute homage to the fact that they’ve basically been doing the episodes of Star Trek on their voyage. Before I go on, I should mention that the movie did a pretty good job paying homage to the things they need to pay homage to. Star Trek Beyond came out after a lot of tragedy has happened in the Star Trek world. Leonard Nemoy passed away. Anton Yelchin sadly died recently. I think there was some kind of anniversary as well. So this movie needed to pay homage to many elements. And they did a really good job doing that. They didn’t take away from the story or the progression of the film, they were perfect little nods that you couldn’t help but appreciate. In fact they actually mesh really well with the story as they help the progression of the characters.

Anyways, Captain James Kirk (played by Chris Pine) mentions that things have gotten a little bit episodic and he starts questioning his choice to be a Starship Captain. He’s looking to get a job in a more stable environment and leave the Enterprise. Interestingly enough, Spock (played by Zachary Quinto) is having his own existential crisis and he is thinking about leaving as well. This exhibits the relationship between these two and really made me appreciate how good these two have been for this franchise. Pine and Quinto have really melded into the characters and they just do a good job. I don’t know if these are the roles you immediately think of when you think of these two actors, but they do a good job.

When the Federation receives a distress signal from a mysterious ship and need to send a response team into an unknown nebula, Kirk volunteers his team and they go on the mission to unknown space.

They however run across an ambush and are boarded by a mysterious group of aliens. This group is led by their brutal leader Krall (played by Idris Elba). The Enterprise is destroyed and the crew are either captured or jettison onto the foreign planet.

At that point, Kirk must find his crew and stop Krall from gaining an ancient artifact that could spell trouble for Kirk’s crew. The rest of the enterprise returns. Simon Pegg returns as Scotty. Carl Urban returns as Bones. Zoey Saldana returns as Uhra, John Cho returns as Mr. Sulu and Anton Yelchin returns as Chekoff. Sofia Boutella joins the cast as an alien marooned on the planet who helps the crew.

I’ll start right off the bat, this movie didn’t need Sofia Boutella’s character. I guess they’re trying to bring in more female characters but at least give us one that is a little more interesting. I didn’t absolutely hate her character, I just didn’t see her point. I think we could have diverted her screentime to more of the crew and I would have enjoyed it more because I’m familiar with that crew and want to see them do more.

Then there’s Idris Elba. There’s a little bit of a twist with his character that isn’t very hard to figure out. On one hand I could complain that there wasn’t anything hugely significant about the bad guys in this movie and they were more the bad guys you would see in an episode of Star Trek. They don’t amount to much and they’re gone in a 60 minute episode. However, thinking about it, I don’t mind that it was that way. Idris Elba’s character serves a purpose for our characters. We learn more about him and because of him we learn more about the main characters. Yes he’s not the world’s greatest mastermind but I actually don’t mind. Idris Elba does a great job being the bad guy in any movie he’s in and while his character wasn’t Darth Vader, I liked how he was used.

And that’s the theme for a lot of this movie. It didn’t feel groundbreaking or epic, it just felt like an episode of the show. And while you expect more from a major motion picture, I can’t really complain. I enjoyed the simple nature of the film and it achieved what it set out to achieve. It didn’t claim to be more than it was and it was entertaining.

The biggest thing of Star Trek Beyond is that it is essentially a love letter to Star Trek. Its goal is pay homage to the legacy of Star Trek, both in the achievements the franchise has had and the losses that they have felt. I don't know if they totally succeed in what they try to do but I thought it was at least somewhat successful. It gave me a little bit of the feels and I did feel a connection to the franchise. 

Is it the best movie I’ve seen this year? No. I don’t know if its anything to write home about but I actually had a lot more fun with this movie because it was so simple.

With the exception of Sofia Boutella’s character, I loved the cast. They really do play off one another really well and there is actually a lot of chemistry between them all. Its hard to point out any stand outs because they really work together as a team. I think this is probably the reason that people don’t immediately think Captain Kirk when they see Chris Pine or Spock when they see Zachary Quinto. These guys are talented actors but there’s not a standout best performance.

The biggest thing I pulled from Star Trek Beyond was that this franchise is not done in my mind. I still want to see future outings with the crew of the Enterprise. I want there to be more Star Trek movies. I think it would be a shame for their not to be another entry in this series because they have been good movies. The first movie is pretty damn good in my book. The second one in my opinion is good but definitely has its problems. And the third one, while simple is a lot of fun too. These movies are scoring at least solid Bs in my book and while that may not seem like its essential, I still think there are stories to be told and fun to be had in the world of Star Trek.

But those are my thoughts on Star Trek Beyond. Did you enjoy this outing of the crew of the Star Trek Enterprise? Do you think they should keep making these films? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviewing coming out of this blog. 

I'll leave you with this. Here's the How it Should have ended. They are better at picking out the plot holes than I am. Enjoy!

Timeless: Pilot

 So I have been watching A LOT of TV lately. I don’t know if it seems that way but I did the pilot for Designated Survivor and then I did the pilot for Westworld, and I’m watching Luke Cage, and I’m pulling myself kicking and screaming to get done with the last 20 or so episodes I have of Lost, I just feel like TV season reviews are going to be trickling out sooner or later and you’re not gonna know what happened. And I’m adding to that list with my review of the pilot for the Time Travel drama, Timeless.

Now on top of a lot of television shows, I have been watching a lot of time travel stories like ALL the Back to the Future movies! It has kind of been my thing for the past month and I actually was looking forward to Timeless.

Timeless actually has a very simple plot. Terrorists break into a science lab that has a time machine. They steal the time machine and start changing events in history. Good guys have their own time machine, and they go and try to stop the terrorists from changing events in history. Week to week episodes take place in some different era or important event.

The main characters make up the core team. You have Lucy (played by Abigail Spencer) a history professor. Wyatt Logan (played by Matt Lanter) the typical soldier of the group who is brought on to actually stop the terrorists. And then you have Rufus Carlin (played by Malcolm Barrett) who is a technician working with the labs before the time machine was stolen.

The really funny part about this pilot was how fast the episode was moving. They really, REALLY wanted to get these characters back in time as soon as they possibly could so we’re not really given much of a background of anything. We don’t know who the criminals are, we don’t know who is developing the time machine, we don’t know who the Chief of Staff from House of Cards really is, everything happens so quickly because they want to get back in time that when they get there, it’s a little bit messy.

The first episode centers on the explosion of the Hindenberg. And don’t get me wrong, when they first get there, its very exciting. They’re racing to the Hindenberg, you see the event from history… and then after that it kind of slows down a little bit and they’re not really sure what to do and they kind of make it up as they go. Which is a line they actually give at the end of the pilot, we can’t make it up as we go anymore. And that’s a pretty good explanation because it really seems like this episode was flying by the seat of its pants and they weren’t exactly sure what they could do, they just knew that there needed to be the introductions to characters, a historic event to prove to the audience that they actually went back in time, and a hinting at a larger story behind the one we’re given at the beginning.

Believe me, by the end of this pilot they do provide some intrigue to make me want to watch at least the next episode or two to see where they’re going with this. However, I think the best thing for this show is to just take a step back, take a breather, and focus on the important thing here. You have a fantastic opportunity here.

If you’ve watched the trailer, you got a little bit of insight into the character of Rufus who is the black technician on the time machine. He’s kind of forced into helping out the group but he flat out says this is a bad idea, that there is no good place for him to go in history because he is black. This might delve into spoilers, but at a certain point in the pilot they end up in jail and he digs into a cop who’s being a little racist and he points out all the great black role models in the future and that history is not on the side of racism. Now in the trailer, they accompany this moment with good swelling music and its actually a pretty cool speech. However, in the pilot he really blows through it and its more of a comedic moment.

Part of the greatness of movies like Back to the Future or these fish out of water stories where someone is in a time that they don’t belong are those moments where they drop a huge amount of wisdom that goes over people in that time’s head because that person is from the future. I think this character has an opportunity to bring both comedic moments and dramatic moments with that fish out of water dynamic but they need to give those moments the time they deserve, especially the dramatic moments if you want us to care about these character. So take a breath, let the audience enjoy the fact that they are time traveling and give the characters some time to react. No pun intended.

Other than that, it’s not a bad pilot. Its just fast moving. Maybe I don’t think the Hindenberg was the best place to start since its not exactly the most interesting event in history, but I’m looking forward to seeing more action packed moments with Timeless.

Future episodes are supposed to take place after the Civil War at Ford’s Theater, in the South Pacific during World War 2 and I’m sure they’re going to have a lot of good locations. I would just hope that the show is able to take a moment and appreciate these locations they’re going to. I hope that they’re not trying to go to a different place each episode because it will be fun to see these character interact with their new environments. I want the characters to have some depth and give some good performances, because the truth is, I want this show to succeed.

Going across time fighting terrorists sounds like a really fun time. But if I’m going to wait a full week for the new episode instead of watching something like Luke Cage I can binge watch on Netflix, the show had better give me something worth my while.

So I think that I’m done picking up new television shows. Yes I have done pilot reviews for Westworld, Designated Survivor, and now Timeless, I am also almost done with all the seasons of Lost on Netflix, I am binge watching Luke Cage, and there’s always something else that comes up that I probably didn’t watch the first time around and am now. I think out of the pilots that I’ve done reviews on, if I had to rank them it would probably go like this.

1. Designated Survivor

2. Westworld

3. Timeless

I like all of them and I’m interested in watching past the pilot episodes of all three.

What about you? Have you seen Timeless? Where would you rank it in pilots that have come out recently? Are there any other shows I should be binge watching? Let me know in the comments below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as send me your requests for movies, and TV shows I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I’ll leave you with this. I'm just about done with Luke Cage and I'm hoping to put up a review in the next day or two. Stay tuned. In the meantime, here's the trailer for the series. Enjoy!

Scouts Guide to the Zombie Apocalypse

So I heard about this movie last year and I actually really wanted to see it. I believe I remember it having a limited release but something about it seemed like a lot of fun. I guess I didn't see it because I had heard that the reviews for it were less than stellar and I tend to be pretty stingy when it comes to movies that I go out and see... except for those that people request, I go out and see those right away.

But after seeing this film, I have to wonder, why didn't this movie do better. Its hilarious!

Scouts Guide focuses on three teenagers in high school who have been in the Boy Scouts since they were very young. Ben Goudy (played by Tye Sheridan) and Carter Grant (played by Logan Miller) play the two Scouts who are trying to be popular and they feel like being in the scouts makes them nerdy and unpopular. Of course there's a fat even nerdier kid named Augie Foster (played by Joey Morgan) who is more into the Scouts than they are and expects the other two to stay in the scouts because they are friends.

Ben and Grant are invited to a senior party and they want to ditch the scout camp out they are having to go to it and leave Augie. At first this starts off as a pretty typical raunchy teen comedy where the goal is to get beer, get laid, and have a crazy time being popular in high school… then the zombie apocalypse happens.

Soon, Ben, Grant, Augie, and a super hot, like incredibly hot, out of their league like nobody’s business hot woman who went to their high school named Denise (played by Sarah Dumont) are paired up to get out of town before the military bombs the city. But first they need to find the secret senior rager that Carter’s sister and Ben’s secret crush is at and save her before the zombie apocalypse happens and everyone dies.

Like I'm not crazy right? There's really no way right?

The best comparison I can give to this movie is Super Bad in the zombie apocalypse. Now you’re probably not going to have as much memorable moments in this movie as you did in Super Bad. You might not have the same amount of quotable lines in this film as you would in Super Bad. At the end of the day, is this movie as good as Super Bad? Well it depends in my opinion.

Super Bad is a movie that I actually think is a little bit overrated. The part of that movie that really succeeded was the fact that they had a lot of actors and actresses that ended up being really big stars. Jonah Hill, Michael Cera, Emma Stone, Seth Rogen, Bill Hader, that is a stacked cast with a lot of talented people. That being the case, you are going to get a lot of funny moments and its going to stick in your memory more.

The truth is, Scouts Guide is probably not going to blow your mind or be as memorable as Super Bad, at least not for the majority of people because it’s ripping off a lot from Super Bad. It’s the typical story of the teenagers going to the popular party and they get distracted on the way there by some crazy hijinxs, they learn about friendship, and the party doesn’t turn out to be all its cracked up to be and they should learn to enjoy what they have. Except it has zombies. There is even a scene where they go to get beer from a liquor store despite being under aged. Is it as good as Super Bad’s scene? No, nothing is going to beat the old woman saying, “Enjoy  fucking Jewels!”, but I think Scouts Guide takes a very creative take on a story that I’ll be honest, is a little bit of rehash.

A big part of the movie is how the Scouts basically are Mcgyver and they can use any objects in their vicinity to create something to get out of the situation or fight the zombies. I think the problem people found with this movie was that it was less about fighting zombies and more about surviving. The weird thing about this movie was that it was really inconsistent about what the zombies could do and how they were programed. Some zombies were your typical zombies you see in The Walking Dead where they just limp towards you and try to bite you. But then you had zombies that could pole dance or sing Brittany Spears. And don’t get me wrong, this was actually something I was a fan of because it showed zombies in a different light and gave me a chuckle here and there. The problem with it was that there was never really an explanation as to why the zombies could throw people across the room, why they could have the motor skills to hold and shoot a gun and yet they’re still zombies. It could have been a really creative idea, but it really didn’t amount to much.

That being said, I actually did really enjoy the jokes in this movie. Yeah a lot of it was pretty juvenile, but the minute that you realize that this is less a zombie movie and more a Super Bad with some zombies, I think it’s something you might enjoy. Doesn’t make the jokes any less juvenile but I had a lot of fun with it.

Now… at a certain point the jokes do kind of reach a point of diminishing returns. Depending on your maturity level you might reach that point earlier, but if you’re like me, it comes at the end where you may say… “yeah they might have taken the raunchy jokes too far”. But it’s the end so that’s not a huge deal for me.

The three main characters of the film are three pretty lesser known actors. The best well known is probably Tye Sheridan who played Cyclops in X-men: Apocalypse. I actually have been watching more and more of him in recent months and I’ve come to enjoy him more and more. But overall, the three Scouts and the incredibly hot, no way these guys could ever get a girl this hot, over the top hot woman  are pretty fun and make up a good team. I think their reactions to the zombies who have their own pretty funny reactions makes a movie that you’re probably not going to write home about but is a fun horror comedy.

I get the feeling I’m in a little bit of a minority based on the reviews of this film. Let me know what you think? Go and check out Scouts Guide to the Zombie Apocalypse and let me know what you think. It is streaming on Hulu right now, give it a watch. Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as send me requests for movies I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I’ll leave you with this. Maybe you've seen this already maybe you haven't but here's the guys who tricked their sister who was on anesthesia that it was the zombie apocalypse and when they went on Ellen. Enjoy!

Westworld: Pilot

So its that time of the year where a lot of new shows come out and I'm taste testing each one of them to see if I like them. I always get a little worried about doing this because I sometimes over extend myself and start watching so many shows and forget about others and I never do the full review. Next thing you know a year has passed and I just have a pilot review and I never watched the entire season. Its not necessarily a bad thing, sometimes shows don't live up to expectations and I just don't finish them. However, for some reason I don't think that's going to happen with Westworld.

Westworld takes place in a future where we have figured out a way to make near human-like quality robots. And what do we do with them? Of course we create a theme park that is themed as a Western where normal people can have their own adventures and choose whether or not they want to go down the heroes path, stop bandits and save the day, or go down the villain path and rape and pillage the old West. The best way to think about it is a very realistic Role Playing Game like Mass Effect or Knights of the Old Republic, where you can choose to hunt down some robbers or you can kill innocent people.

The world is populated by these human-like robots called hosts. The game makers tinker and toy with these robots to make them as life like as they can, manipulating what they remember and what they don't to keep the realistic reactions, but keep them in a cycle where they don't remember that the patrons of the park do to them. The other interesting thing about this is that the robots are also at the height of innovation in the world because they've been used to create new limbs and even the creator of the world, Dr. Robert Ford (played by Anthony Hopkins) has said that this technology could even bring someone back from the dead if they took it to the next level.

In a way, this show is very much like Jurassic Park but instead of Dinosaurs, you have Terminators, and Anthony Hopkins is their John Hammond.

So there are a couple of things to unpack with this pilot because a lot happens.

First and foremost, I didn't just say Jurassic Park with Terminators because they were human-like robots, there is a sense in the show that these guys might be forming sentience due to an update in their system, created by the guy who created artificial people, Bernard Lowe (played by Jeffery Wright). You've got Lowe, and Ford and all the other staff of Westworld trying to figure out the issues with the program since the new update and trying to make the world safe and yet at the same time, keep it profitable.

Then you have the actual world. Its a really interesting dynamic having the duality of a modern to almost sci fi world in the "the real world" with the gamemakers, and then the western world. In Westworld, you have the computer programs that you will be seeing week to week, most namely the ones played by big name actors like James Marsden, and Thandie Newton. However, even in the pilot you start to see some kind of personality forming and you're not totally sure if its sentience or just the update making them more realistic.

On top of all of that, you have Ed Harris playing a man who has been playing the game a very long time. I thought he said 30 years but regardless, he has been playing for a long time and he definitely has some kind of secret goal in the show. He's a brutal guy and he knows the rules of the game. I'm really interested to see where his character goes, not only because he is Ed Harris, but because he is so very evil that I'm really looking forward to how his character progresses.

And then you have Evan Rachael Wood playing the Host, Delores.

So in the first episode, Delores doesn't exactly do a lot. She kind of plays the damsel, she needs saving and she just seems content with the entire experience of being in a program like this. However, there is definitely an inkling, without giving too much away, that she is going to be a huge part of this show and its going to be in a very bad ass way.

Unfortunately, there's not a lot to talk about because the pilot spends a lot of time introducing the characters and laying down the rules of Westworld. There is definitely some foreshadowing for some shit that is no doubt going to go down, and some foreshadowing for future plot lines like Ed Harris's whole story to come out in future episodes.

There is also only so much I can say because there is a reveal at the end of the episode that is pretty important and will drive the entire story going forward.

Am I going to check out Westworld next week? I think I am. I think it had a really strong pilot with some really interesting characters, some really interesting ideas, and again, its basically Jurassic Park with Terminators, what else could you ask for? My only hope for the future of the show is that it doesn't get too much more sci-fi-y.

I love a good sci fi film or TV show. My favorite movie of all time, Star Wars, is a sci fi fantasy film, so I do love it when things get to that level. However, the cool thing about the pilot episode is that this is in a very unique style of sci fi. It has the elements of science fiction, it takes place in a world with technology that does not exist. And yet, it has a real world feeling to it. People aren't wearing weird headsets or shooting lazers, it feels like this could actually happen. It also has more of a cerebral feeling to it as opposed to overtly science fiction and that's what I like about it. I'm looking forward to seeing where this show goes but I don't want it to get too far down the science fiction road that it doesn't feel real or gritty. I usually hate when people say gritty and realistic because it has a bad connotation now but for this I feel like it works.

Luckily, I think HBO has a very good track record at easing us into the overtly science fiction or fantasy tropes. Just look at Game of Thrones, it is set in a world of Fantasy but it took them a long time to really delve into the stereotypical fantasy tropes like giants, dragons, and magic because they wanted to lay down a foundation of realistic groundedness and as long as they do the same for Westworld, I am going to be on board for a long time.

But those are my thoughts on Westworld. What do you think? Have you checked it out yet? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as send me your requests for films and TV shows I should watch and review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I'll leave you with this. In case you haven't seen the pilot and still have no idea what the show is like, here's the trailer for the show to give you a better look. Enjoy!

Steve Jobs

October seems to be the month of me watching movies I said I was going to check out a long time ago and am now just getting around to it. I watched the Ashton Kutcher Biopic of Jobs about this time last year because this movie was coming out and I wanted to see it. Of course because I have the attention span of a fly, I missed this movie and didn't watch it until it was able to be screened on HBO. However, to give the Ashton Kutcher Jobs movie credit, it actually helps to watch that movie first then watch this movie. That way you know the context, you know the whole story in its entirety, even if it doesn't feel complete, and you can delve more into the performances and the structure of this film because I will tell you, it is different. 

Steve Jobs is executed like a three act play. Each act of the movie takes place before the launch of

one of Job's quintessential products, The Macintosh, the Next Computer, and the IMac. You never see the launch and you never see anybody give any kind of presentation, but you do see Steve Jobs (played by Michael Fassbender) interact with people who had considerable influence on his life and the relationships that were the most important to him.

The entire movie he's being guided by his Marketing Assistant Johanna Hoffman (played by Kate Winslet). He interacts with his partners in founding Apple Steve Wozniak (played by Seth Rogen) and Andy Hertzfield (played by Michael Stuhlbarg). He talks with John Sculley (played by Jeff Daniels), the CEO of Apple and the closest thing Steve Jobs had to a father figure. And finally there are the interactions between him, his college girlfriend Chrisann Brennan (played by Katherine Waterston) and his daughter Lisa (played in multiple ages by Makenzie Moss, Ripley Sobo, and Perla Haney-Jardine), whom he for a long time refused to acknowledge was his actual daughter.

The great part of the film is that its able to hone in on the important events in Job's life, show glimpses of the smaller details without actually showing them, and delve into the characters better in pretty much the same amount of time as the Ashton Kutcher film. I'll just get it out of the way, Steve Jobs is a lot better of a film than Jobs was, because it was focused and concise on the parts it needed to be, and gave justice to the smaller things without making the movie feel bloated. 

Now, does that mean the movie is perfect? No it doesn't. There is plenty to talk about. 

I loved the three act nature of this movie. You really felt the close quarters of the film and it felt like a play. The stage was backstage as crowds of people gathered to see the unveiling of the new product and the preparation of that presentation is a close intimate location to really delve into some great character moments. 

Unfortunately, Michael Fassbender's Jobs isn't the greatest example to start on. Don't get me wrong, Fassbender gives a great performance. He really exemplifies a very complicated man who definitely goes through a transformation in two decades. You see how his life changes him and yet you don't feel like he's a different man. The problem with Fassbender isn't his ability to make us feel with his performance, the problem was there was nothing totally identifying Fassbender as playing Steve Jobs. 

Now I get it, its a hard thing to capture a man who is more of a legend than a public figure. Unless you are looking deep and comparing Fassbender's Jobs with actual video, there's nothing to really distinguish Jobs as his own individual. The one advantage Kutcher had on Fassbender was that he kind of looks like Jobs. I still think Fassbender gave the better performance, but I wasn't always convinced that I wasn't just watching Fassbender play a really interesting character as opposed to playing Jobs the really interesting character. 

Now if you know the behind the scenes story of this movie, you'll know that Fassbender wasn't the original choice to play Jobs. The role was handed down by multiple actors including Christian Bale and Leonardo DiCaprio to name a few. At the end of the day, you're not going to complain if you end up with Fassbender as your third choice. The way Fassbender plays off other people really shows the relationship that Jobs had with them, especially the relationship with his daughter throughout the years. 

The one other thing about Michael Fassbender that I couldn't really shake in this movie, especially in

the beginning, was how great Batman v Superman would have been if Michael Fassbender had just done this performance as Lex Luthor instead of Jesse Eisenberg. The first act of the movie takes place in 1984 when Jobs was at his highest and probably the biggest asshole he ever was. The way he threatens his technicians, is condescending to Steve Wozniak, and sees himself as some kind of God is really something I would have loved to see in Lex Luthor and would have made Batman v Superman an amazing film... but I'm getting sidetracked.

Overall, Fassbender gave a really good performance, I just couldn't quite shake the fact that he didn't really look like Steve Jobs. And surprisingly, Fassbender couldn't quite get the American accent down. The actor was born in German and for some reason you get hints of a German accent in this film. I think it might have been the fact that Kate Winslet's character had a polish accent and maybe that pulled it out of Fassbender. Regardless, its a fantastic performance, I'm just not sure if it screamed Steve Jobs. 

Kate Winslet is a strong presence in the film. She is Job's marketing assistant and his personal confidant. She is there for a lot of the quintessential moments of Job's life and she's able to bring a lot of heart and soul to the movie. She provides a bit of a conscience to this guy who is just an asshole at times and but its a touching relationship all the same. 

The biggest surprise of the movie was the performance we got from Seth Rogen as Steve Wozniak.

This is a performance you would never really expect from Seth Rogen, the guy who just made an animated movie that ended with Sausages and a bunch of food having a giant orgy. But Rogen actually gives one of the best performances of his career in this film. I think there's a misrepresentation of Steve Wozniak that this movie gets right. This film portrays him more as a man who didn't bad mouth Steve Jobs because he thought he deserved more credit for Apple's existent, he is portrayed more as a humble guy who thinks that the way Jobs does things is wrong. Some of the best scenes in the movie are the exchanges between Jobs and Wozniak and the credit belongs to Fassbender and Rogen for being able to portray these characters so well.

And then there's Jeff Daniels as John Sculley. I love Jeff Daniels. I think he is one of the most

underrated dramatic actors and I'm really glad he's been getting more and more opportunities to shine recently. Before watching the film I didn't know who Daniels was playing and then when I realized he was playing John Sculley, I thought that was absolutely perfect. My absolute favorite part in the film is the exchange between Sculley and Jobs where they talk about the circumstances that led to Job's firing from Apple in 1985. The acting and the cinematography, comparing the conversation before the presentation in 1988 with flashbacks from 1985 was a great way to show the duality of these characters and their relationship is done really well. I think I would have enjoyed more of a climatic ending to these two in the final act, but you could tell, that wasn't how they wanted to end the movie.

The real touching moments are the ones between Jobs and his daughter. If you want to talk about

evolving relationships, this is the best of the best. My favorite stories of actors portraying roles is when their vision for the role is exactly how it turns out, and Fassbender wanted to show Jobs as someone who had incredible vision and passion that got in the way of other things as opposed to just

being a cruel person. And that's exactly how it came off in this film. At the end when he admits to his daughter, "I'm poorly made" that hit just the right note and the entire movie really fits together beautifully.

I think a lot of the credit goes to writer Aaron Sorkin who is just able to write brilliant dialogue. It made a subject I had already watched a 2 hour movie on when I watched Jobs, seem interesting all over again when done in a different format.

I really wish this movie had come out instead of the Ashton Kutcher one because this one is just done better. It streamlines the important parts of the story, it provides beautifully crafted relationships through simple conversations back stage before a huge presentation, and it had well written dialogue that makes you feel and get a glimpse, even if it is a dramatized glimpse, into the life of a really inspiring person.

Did it have moments where I felt I was watching the missed potential of a perfect Lex Luthor, yes. But overall I really enjoyed Steve Jobs and definitely recommend you check it out. 

But what did you think? Did you think this movie righted the wrongs started by Ashton Kutcher's Jobs? Which did you prefer? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as send me your requests for movies I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog. 

I'll leave you with this. When I first saw the title of this video, I didn't wanna use it because while its pretty obvious through previous accounts that Steve Jobs had a little bit of a temper and wasn't always the most pleasant person, I don't want to bad mouth the guy and say that's all he was. I chose this video to actually show that the man was more than his words and inspirational quotes you get online, he had personality. And whether or not Fassbender was able to portray that correctly, I think its worth having a least a little bit of a comparison to know what the movie is trying to convey. Enjoy!

Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation

So yeah... we live in a world where the fifth Mission Impossible is a better James Bond film than Spectre was... I don't know if I'm proud or disappointed. 

I've been pretty spotty with my reviews of the Mission Impossible franchise. I guess I only feel like the odd numbered ones are worth reviewing for some reason? And while the series has not always been the best, I think its fascinating that its still going and Tom Cruise continues to look as if he hasn't aged a day. Seriously, that guy is literally a vampire sucking the life blood of younger actors to keep his incredible, scientologist, probably still crazy in real life form. 

Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation picks up not long after the events of Ghost Protocol. The secret

organization mentioned near the end of Ghost Protocol called "The Syndicate" are back but the only person who realizes this and is working to stop it is Ethan Hunt (played by Tom Cruise). IMF, or the Impossible Mission Force is disbanded and absorbed by the CIA, a question I realize I had and mentioned in my review of the first film. Alec Baldwin plays a CIA official set on ending IMF and bringing Ethan Hunt in from the field. But Hunt is on the warpath to stop the Syndicate and he's willing to be a fugitive to do it.

Hunt is of course assisted by his trusty team that we've seen from previous films. Simon Pegg reprises his role as Benjamin "Benji" Dunn, Ving Rhames returns as Luther, and Jeremy Renner returns as his role from Ghost Protocol, William Brandt. Overall, this team is actually pretty good and worth watching. 

But the real breakout star of the movie is by far Rebecca Ferguson playing Ilsa Faust. Faust works for

the Syndicate, however she proves herself early on to have more to her than that and actually seems to be working with Ethan at times. The entire movie pretty much centers around Ethan trying to find the leader of the Syndicate and going back and forth on whether or not Faust is worth trusting or not.

And yeah, overall, this movie is a much better James Bond movie than Spectre was and that actually really surprised me. I remember when I did my review for the first Mission Impossible, it was right after both the trailer for Spectre and Rogue Nation dropped. I actually thought that Spectre was going to be the better film and that's not what happened at all.

I don't want to give the idea that I didn't like the previous Mission Impossible films. That would be as far from the truth as it could be. The past two were just not my favorite films. I am on record saying that I did not like the third film and the fourth one just isn't really memorable to me, entertaining, but not memorable. Rogue Nation took things to a whole new level and really made the series legitimate in my book. It seems like they will try and continue this series on until at the very least Tom Cruise dies, or they can find somebody as charismatic that could carry on the franchise. 

And I find that latter option to be very difficult because Tom Cruise has created a character in Ethan

Hunt that is just the epitome of Tom Cruise. Again, while Ethan Hunt isn't the most intriguing character, he's just your pretty run of the mill spy and yet Cruise gives him that charisma and grace that makes you root for him the entire time. Consistency in the character has never been a huge issue but it reminds me of earlier Bond films. While the new ones have delved more into the personal history of the character of James Bond films, the earlier films just gave him a personality and let him go on his spying adventures. I get a vibe that that is more what the later Mission Impossible movies are doing, especially Ghost Protocol and Rogue Nation. Ethan Hunt is just a badass, there's not much else to him. Once that's established in this movie with him hanging on the outside of a Cargo plane. And when I say him, I actually mean Tom Cruise literally hung onto the side of a cargo plane lifting off, that is one hundred percent real.

But again, I think the real star of this movie was no doubt Rebecca Ferguson as Ilsa Faust. And I

think the main reason why this is is because she is basically a female James Bond. It is revealed that she was, at one point, British Intelligence, MI6 which is the exact organization James Bond works for. And since there is a little bit of a Spy v Spy element of this movie, this is probably the closest thing we will get to an Ethan Hunt v James Bond movie we will ever get. The chemistry between Tom Cruise and Rebecca Ferguson is really well done as well and the two really bring something new to the franchise that the other installments have not been able to do.

Aside from the relationship between Faust and Hunt, Ferguson brings her A game with her acting and the struggle she has with this character. I haven't seen Ferguson in a lot of movies but after Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation, I'm really looking forward to seeing her in more movies and there is no way that they're not going to include her in future Mission Impossible movies. 

The other performances in the movie are a lot of fun. Simon Pegg does a really good job reprising his

role and he's now become a huge part in the Mission Impossible Franchise. Ving Rhames is always fun and Jeremy Renner does his same Hawkeye bit that works for him. I think the only performance that felt weird was the addition of Alec Baldwin. I didn't hate his performance, I just thought it was a little bit distracting since Baldwin is best known for his comedies and seeing him as a CIA agent just made me think that Jack Donaghy from 30 Rock left show business and joined the CIA in his later years. I think if he returns in the next film I might be able to give him another shot, but for now, I wasn't a huge fan of Baldwin in this role just because it was a little bit distracting. I should probably see it more as Jack Ryan from the Hunt for Red October instead of Jack Donaghy but that's where I'm at right now.

Other things to talk about: the action. The action in this movie is really well done. The stunts, the effects,and the action set pieces are done in a way that actually legitimizes Mission Impossible in a way it took a long time to be legitimized. Its definitely still a PG-13 film but some of the shoot outs were pretty raw and it gave us an opportunity to be impressed with Ethan Hunt the way we've been impressed with Daniel Craig as James Bond.

After rereading my review of Spectre, I realize that these movies are not that much different. The plot is similar in that there is another organization that wants to disband MI6 or IMF and the main character must go on a rogue mission to stop the shady anti-IMF or anti-MI6 organization, The Syndicate v Spectre. Along the way the main character uses his techy friends and bosses that were in the spy organization originally to work secretly with them and they meet a woman whois pretty shady and you don't know which side she's actually on... 

Again, I don't know if I'm more excited that Mission Impossible did a James Bond film better than

James Bond did, or if I'm more disappointed that James Bond didn't do James Bond as well as Mission Impossible did it.

Overall, Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation is a pretty special film. Not only was it a good Mission Impossible film which is a good bar but still pretty low in comparison, but it was a good spy film. It upped the ante, it made characters really likable, and it gave us some good action. Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation will probably go down as my favorite spy movie of 2015... as I review in in October of 2016. Definitely watch it if you have the opportunity, its worth checking out.

But those are my thoughts on Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation. What did you think? Which did you like better, Spectre or Rogue Nation, was there a better Spy film in 2016 that I may or may not have reviewed and I'm just biased because I just watched this movie? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for movies I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie reviews and news coming out of this blog. 

I'll leave you with this. Not really sure how I found this or how its relevant, but here's a video of our greatest fictional heroes, including Ethan Hunt, playing Pokemon Go... Enjoy!